Are COVID restrictions ignoring mental health issues?

[Domh245]

and let's not say South Korea - they have had as many coronavirus cases all year as the UK has in the last day and a half

Why do you think that is? Is it because, perchance, they've got a really good test & trace system and were/are able to nip infections in the bud to prevent it growing into the sort of numbers we see.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apart from the entire first half of the article, the seems keen to suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown narrative is some far-right libertarian.

I would say anyone who advocates "let it rip", which at least one person on here does, is deluded and misguided. I wouldn't say it says much about their politics.

 

[big_rig]

Why do you think that is? Is it because, perchance, they've got a really good test & trace system and were/are able to nip infections in the bud to prevent it growing into the sort of numbers we see.

They are (effectively) an island where no non-citizens are allowed in without undertaking a mandatory, self-funded 14 day quarantine in a government facility. If the UK was in that situation I'm sure ours would work fine too.

As an experiment, if a plane load of people arrived in South Korea with covid and were allowed to freely mingle we would see how well their system works. If it managed to cope with that we could replace the plane with twenty thousand people (one day's worth on a bad day in the UK) with covid and see how it handled that.

Anyway this is getting off topic. Mental health wise I see Keir Starmer has announced his support for a 'two/three week circuit breaker' to 'get a grip of test and trace.' I would count this as 'gaslighting' the country!

 

[DB]

I would say anyone who advocates "let it rip", which at least one person on here does, is deluded and misguided. I wouldn't say it says much about their politics.

Do you reckon you could find a new term to replace that dismissive one? It's clearly intended to denigrate anyone who thinks that letting it run through the healthy population to gain herd immunity is the way to go.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you reckon you could find a new term to replace that dismissive one? It's clearly intended to denigrate anyone who thinks that letting it run through the healthy population to gain herd immunity is the way to go.

Yes, it is. The idea is ludicrous and unworkable.

I am inclined to support mitigation rather than suppression, which seems to be what we are doing now (i.e. having some restrictions to stop it running away, and possibly adding shielding back, but accepting a fairly high caseload). However, removing all restrictions entirely is cloud cuckoo land.

 

[Domh245]

They are (effectively) an island where no non-citizens are allowed in without undertaking a mandatory, self-funded 14 day quarantine in a government facility. If the UK was in that situation I'm sure ours would work fine too.

As an experiment, if a plane load of people arrived in South Korea with covid and were allowed to freely mingle we would see how well their system works. If it managed to cope with that we could replace the plane with twenty thousand people (one day's worth on a bad day in the UK) with covid and see how it handled that.

If the UK were an Island (oh wait, it is..) and were strictly enforcing a 14 day quarantine on arrival then yes, our test & trace system probably would cope with anything that managed to fall through the cracks, so to speak. Whether it's desirable/economically viable to have a system like that is another matter of course

The point is, the South Korean T&T system worked well because they were able to act quickly and limit the spread. If the UK's T&T system was effective then it would have been able to deal with the smaller case numbers at the end of the first lockdown and any growth we'd be seeing now would be much smaller, if at all. Obviously no countries test & trace system would work effectively when there's 10s of thousands of new cases daily, but we had our 'golden opportunity' and wasted it, short of a second full hard lockdown.

 

[DB]

Yes, it is. The idea is ludicrous and unworkable.

I am inclined to support mitigation rather than suppression, which seems to be what we are doing now (i.e. having some restrictions to stop it running away, and possibly adding shielding back, but accepting a fairly high caseload). However, removing all restrictions entirely is cloud cuckoo land.

It's unworkable in your opinion - which is not one shared by everybody.

Proponents of the open-close-open-close strategy don't seem to have any idea of how this can end unless there's a vaccine fairly soon - and if there isn't, the virus will get to everyone sooner or later.

 

[MikeWM]

Mental health wise I see Keir Starmer has announced his support for a 'two/three week circuit breaker' to 'get a grip of test and trace.' I would count this as 'gaslighting' the country!

Fortunately for *my* mental health, I quit the Labour party some months ago. (Doesn't stop them sending me continual emails however).

My mother (in Liverpool) emailed me this afternoon to complain about what she called 'the general atmosphere of misery' up there and how it is getting to her. She'll be ok. she's pretty resilient to stuff, but it really does feel like no-one cares about the effects of all this on *everyone's* mental health.

 

[Howardh]

"Will I catch covid, will I die?" "Will I be in lockdown again, how long for?" "How much of my life will I have left when we are back to normal" "Why is my calendar empty, am I dead?"

Repeat ad nausium. Those four questions are going through my head every time I look at a PC, look at a newspaper, look at the TV, switch the radio on.

Fifth question - "how long can I put up with this?".

 

[Yew]

Yes, it is. The idea is ludicrous and unworkable.

I am inclined to support mitigation rather than suppression, which seems to be what we are doing now (i.e. having some restrictions to stop it running away, and possibly adding shielding back, but accepting a fairly high caseload). However, removing all restrictions entirely is cloud cuckoo land.

Are you trying to be purposely obstinent?

 

[duncanp]

Mental health wise I see Keir Starmer has announced his support for a 'two/three week circuit breaker' to 'get a grip of test and trace.' I would count this as 'gaslighting' the country!

In his speech, Sir Keir Starmer said that businesses forced to close during a two to three week circuit breaker lockdown should be compensated by the government.

To what extent should they be compensated, and does Sir Keir have any idea about how much this would cost, or where we would get the money to pay for it.

SAGE have said that a circuit breaker would set back the course of the virus by 28 days. So 28 days after the end of the circuit breaker, the course of the virus would be back to where it was, and SAGE would be calling for another circuit breaker, and so on..................

Getting back on topic, does anyone have any idea of the effect such constant uncertainty would have on people's mental health?

Not knowing from one week to the next what is going to happen to your business, or whether you are going to have an income, or whether you are going to be able to meet with loved ones, is bound to increase levels of stress, anxiety and depression.

For the sake of people's mental health, have to find a middle way, which means that there will be some level of restrictions short of a full lockdown, but which can be maintained over a longer period of time.

 

[big_rig]

If the UK were an Island (oh wait, it is..) and were strictly enforcing a 14 day quarantine on arrival then yes, our test & trace system probably would cope with anything that managed to fall through the cracks, so to speak. Whether it's desirable/economically viable to have a system like that is another matter of course

The point is, the South Korean T&T system worked well because they were able to act quickly and limit the spread. If the UK's T&T system was effective then it would have been able to deal with the smaller case numbers at the end of the first lockdown and any growth we'd be seeing now would be much smaller, if at all. Obviously no countries test & trace system would work effectively when there's 10s of thousands of new cases daily, but we had our 'golden opportunity' and wasted it, short of a second full hard lockdown.

I don't think we are really disagreeing on much then - the only way for test and trace to be the way 'out' of the situation (as opposed to a 'bolt on' at the moment) is to:

1) Have a full-on lockdown of at least a month (not Starmer's three weeks which is full of holes), to get numbers down to as close to zero as possible and to develop whatever counts as a 'gold standard' system;
2) Enforce quarantine South Korea/New Zealand/Australia style indefinitely until if/when there is a vaccine. Note: Australia does not expect anybody to freely come in or out of the country until late 2022 I read recently.
3) Come up with some way of dealing with flare-ups to avoid going back to square 1, indefinitely.

I don't see how societal buy-in for either of these is possible, unless there were March-levels of cases/deaths, but even then that would seem unlikely as it would be for the purpose of introducing some speculative technology (not to mention whatever other societal controls South Korea adopted), and that there isn't the same fear of the virus in society now we know the average age of victims is 82/a quarter are over 90/a fifth of deaths in England had dementia etc etc.

Going back to mental health, I don't think there would really be many takers for this given the effects suffered last time and currently, but the idea of 'gold standard test and trace' will still be there as a carrot, giving people needless false hope.

 

[brad465]

In short, they definitely are, where 7 months on I'm starting to feel the whole thing takes its toll, despite comfortably enjoying working from home throughout, while citing experiences of depression 11 years ago as having parallels with the situation now, which I've used to my advantage as a way of knowing things will get better.

I've seen others elsewhere online talking about how it's easy for SAGE (in their secure positions) to come up with all these restrictions and think they will work in their favour, but if they were in the position of anyone fearing for their job, or having already lost their job, among other negative situations brought about by this, they might think differently.

Does anyone know if there is anyone on SAGE with psychology experience who could thus grasp expected human behaviour from all this (wouldn't be surprised if there is nobody)?

 

[big_rig]

In short, they definitely are, where 7 months on I'm starting to feel the whole thing takes its toll, despite comfortably enjoying working from home throughout, while citing experiences of depression 11 years ago as having parallels with the situation now, which I've used to my advantage as a way of knowing things will get better.

I've seen others elsewhere online talking about how it's easy for SAGE (in their secure positions) to come up with all these restrictions and think they will work in their favour, but if they were in the position of anyone fearing for their job, or having already lost their job, among other negative situations brought about by this, they might think differently.

Does anyone know if there is anyone on SAGE with psychology experience who could thus grasp expected human behaviour from all this (wouldn't be surprised if there is nobody)?

There is one professor of psychology I can think of who sits on a body (SPI-M) which reports into SAGE. He is keeping himself busy writing articles in the guardian about how Boris is bad and how another lockdown needs to happen. I would have thought it might have been a better use of his time to advise privately on the valid points you raise but apparently I am wrong an it’s better for him to write opinion pieces, sit on twitter and doing TV interviews

Johnson has ignored the science and blown our chance to stop a second wave | Stephen Reicher

The government could have controlled the virus had it heeded Sage’s advice, says professor of psychology Stephen Reicher

amp.theguardian.com

Johnson has ignored the science and blown our chance to stop a second wave

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is one professor of psychology I can think of who sits on a body (SPI-M) which reports into SAGE. He is keeping himself busy writing articles in the guardian about how Boris is bad and how another lockdown needs to happen. I would have thought it might have been a better use of his time to advise privately on the valid points you raise but apparently I am wrong an it’s better for him to write opinion pieces, sit on twitter and doing TV interviews

Johnson has ignored the science and blown our chance to stop a second wave | Stephen Reicher

The government could have controlled the virus had it heeded Sage’s advice, says professor of psychology Stephen Reicher

amp.theguardian.com

I'd rather the debate was entirely public, so I must disagree strongly.

 

[Yew]

I'd rather the debate was entirely public, so I must disagree strongly.

Perhaps about the transparency I could agree, but a psychologist ignoring the psychological issues caused, and playing as an epidemiologist is pretty poor.

If he had a physics degree, he could maybe move into epidemiological modelling.

 

[crablab]

If he had a physics degree, he could maybe move into epidemiological modelling.

You don't necessarily need a degree to be qualified to do something

I'm not sure what his experience, background and research area is, but presumably he has suitable qualifications for the role he's performing. If you believe otherwise, it would be interesting to understand on what basis.

 

[takno]

Does anyone know if there is anyone on SAGE with psychology experience who could thus grasp expected human behaviour from all this (wouldn't be surprised if there is nobody)?

There are psychologists, but not as far as I can see any psychiatrists or psychotherapists. Mostly the psychologists are from the "what can we successfully bully people into doing before they break?" mould, rather than caring about people or regarding them as human in an meaningful way

 

[C J Snarzell]

As someone who has suffered from depression myself, I know full well the symptoms and the triggers that lead to feeling down.

I've never been a big fan of Winter or Christmas for that matter. We are now less than two weeks away from the clocks going back and I am already dreading the long endless nights and short days with little daylight if the weather is crap.

I generally think the original lockdown worked because of the time of year. The weather was great and there was at least some feeling of contentment just by being able to sit outside, relax and embrace some sunshine. I could at least go and have a brew at my dad's by sitting his garden and ensure I didn't come into direct contact with him. If I was at a loose end - I could go for a long walk or a bike ride, maybe drive to the coast with the dog.

However, we are now looking at endless days being confined indoors, with no physical contact with friends and family and the worst thing is that this whole mess is just never ending. If we knew it was going to be behind us in say a month or two, you could at least look forward to the light at the end of the very dark tunnel.

The worst thing about all this now is the thought this nightmare is going to continue well into 2021 and none of us can make plans for holidays, breaks, meet ups, or even having that chat with a pal over a pint.

I have been using the gym, which does improve the state of mind but again this is another pass time potentially being denied us if our area ends up in Tier 3.

Also mental health can lead to other problems such as alcohol dependancy. But yet most alcohol support groups have been frozen since March. Again eating disorders can develop from mental health but there are no slimming clubs taking place to help those who comfort eat and suffer weight problems.

Job losses lead to people suffer massive depression and long term mental health problems because of no income and then the further problems of not being able to pay the mortgate or feed the children.

Its almost as if non-Covid vulnerable people have been left to fight it alone and the simple message from idiots like Boris Johnson & Matt Hancock is that they couldn't care less because Covid takes priority.

CJ

 

[bramling]

As someone who has suffered from depression myself, I know full well the symptoms and the triggers that lead to feeling down.

I've never been a big fan of Winter or Christmas for that matter. We are now less than two weeks away from the clocks going back and I am already dreading the long endless nights and short days with little daylight if the weather is crap.

I generally think the original lockdown worked because of the time of year. The weather was great and there was at least some feeling of contentment just by being able to sit outside, relax and embrace some sunshine. I could at least go and have a brew at my dad's by sitting his garden and ensure I didn't come into direct contact with him. If I was at a loose end - I could go for a long walk or a bike ride, maybe drive to the coast with the dog.

However, we are now looking at endless days being confined indoors, with no physical contact with friends and family and the worst thing is that this whole mess is just never ending. If we knew it was going to be behind us in say a month or two, you could at least look forward to the light at the end of the very dark tunnel.

The worst thing about all this now is the thought this nightmare is going to continue well into 2021 and none of us can make plans for holidays, breaks, meet ups, or even having that chat with a pal over a pint.

I have been using the gym, which does improve the state of mind but again this is another pass time potentially being denied us if our area ends up in Tier 3.

Also mental health can lead to other problems such as alcohol dependancy. But yet most alcohol support groups have been frozen since March. Again eating disorders can develop from mental health but there are no slimming clubs taking place to help those who comfort eat and suffer weight problems.

Job losses lead to people suffer massive depression and long term mental health problems because of no income and then the further problems of not being able to pay the mortgate or feed the children.

Its almost as if non-Covid vulnerable people have been left to fight it alone and the simple message from idiots like Boris Johnson & Matt Hancock is that they couldn't care less because Covid takes priority.

CJ

It doesn't help that a lot of people have taken the line "I'm going to write-off 2020" as a strategy to deal with this, and it's now appearing this is going to drag well beyond that. Boris making claims that this is going to be over in time for Christmas is *extremely* irresponsible as it's quite clear that's not going to be the case.

The damage is being done *now*. A friend tells me he was at an attraction today, open subject to the usual restrictions, the owner said "this is killing me, I don't think I can keep this place open much longer". Half the place had already been mothballed to reduce costs. It does bug me that we hear so much about the hospitality sector, however it goes *far* beyond that.

 

[kez19]

For me you would think government(s) would have applied something as backup even after first lockdown but it just feels they can't be bothered, yet on the other why are the media not talking much about this in a broader picture? For me I am now at least waiting 2 years on seeing if I have Aspergers (general query) but I am just lucky to get an orthodontist appointment in next few weeks (pending on all this too), but I am in full agreement regardless that no matter the health issues (including mental/physical and emotional) people have, they should be doing more now than later.

I remember I think it was last Thursday or Friday, listening to Newsday on BBC World Service (might have been about 0645-0715), they spoke to a person about mental health issues but felt like nobody was there for support (sure even the person had a dig at the media in general about it too).

 

[35B]

It's unworkable in your opinion - which is not one shared by everybody.

Proponents of the open-close-open-close strategy don't seem to have any idea of how this can end unless there's a vaccine fairly soon - and if there isn't, the virus will get to everyone sooner or later.

It may. But if I look back to the spring, I recall hospitals utterly unable to cope, and significant numbers of deaths following. I'm extremely relieved that we're not following that curve now, but notice that the case loads are still rising steeply, with hospitalisations, ICU admissions and deaths rising proportionately as those cases take their toll. I then also notice reports today of a couple of cases of reinfection where, due to simple lack of data, we do not know whether they are outliers that you would expect with any virus, or a sign that immunity is short lived.

If the latter, and it's not as though the possibility hasn't been signalled for a while, then herd immunity is, by definition, never going to be attainable. And that would mean that "letting it rip", a policy with a devilishly high price on it, wouldn't deliver the results it's proponents suggest as a trade-off.

That has significant impacts for how we consider mental health. Since WWII, this country has not had an endemic, highly transmissible, disease with routinely lethal potential. All my life, life expectancies have risen, and discussions around health and well-being have not had to contend with endemic diseases of the sort that my grandparents generation faced.

It is right to be concerned about the impact of current policy on mental health, and the retreat into a single minded focus on conditions of the body rather than the mind is a disgrace. However, it is not right to act as though it's a one way bet; there will be significant costs as we as a population have to accommodate to changes in the impact our conduct as individuals may have on others, and their's on us.

 

[takno]

It may. But if I look back to the spring, I recall hospitals utterly unable to cope, and significant numbers of deaths following. I'm extremely relieved that we're not following that curve now, but notice that the case loads are still rising steeply, with hospitalisations, ICU admissions and deaths rising proportionately as those cases take their toll. I then also notice reports today of a couple of cases of reinfection where, due to simple lack of data, we do not know whether they are outliers that you would expect with any virus, or a sign that immunity is short lived.

If the latter, and it's not as though the possibility hasn't been signalled for a while, then herd immunity is, by definition, never going to be attainable. And that would mean that "letting it rip", a policy with a devilishly high price on it, wouldn't deliver the results it's proponents suggest as a trade-off.

That has significant impacts for how we consider mental health. Since WWII, this country has not had an endemic, highly transmissible, disease with routinely lethal potential. All my life, life expectancies have risen, and discussions around health and well-being have not had to contend with endemic diseases of the sort that my grandparents generation faced.

It is right to be concerned about the impact of current policy on mental health, and the retreat into a single minded focus on conditions of the body rather than the mind is a disgrace. However, it is not right to act as though it's a one way bet; there will be significant costs as we as a population have to accommodate to changes in the impact our conduct as individuals may have on others, and their's on us.

Yes I noticed the reports of rapid reinfection today as well. In particular I noticed that the woman who died was 89 years old, severely immunocompromised by a rare cancer, and undergoing chemotherapy. In the circumstances I'd have been surprised if she was immune to anything

 

[bramling]

It may. But if I look back to the spring, I recall hospitals utterly unable to cope, and significant numbers of deaths following. I'm extremely relieved that we're not following that curve now, but notice that the case loads are still rising steeply, with hospitalisations, ICU admissions and deaths rising proportionately as those cases take their toll. I then also notice reports today of a couple of cases of reinfection where, due to simple lack of data, we do not know whether they are outliers that you would expect with any virus, or a sign that immunity is short lived.

If the latter, and it's not as though the possibility hasn't been signalled for a while, then herd immunity is, by definition, never going to be attainable. And that would mean that "letting it rip", a policy with a devilishly high price on it, wouldn't deliver the results it's proponents suggest as a trade-off.

That has significant impacts for how we consider mental health. Since WWII, this country has not had an endemic, highly transmissible, disease with routinely lethal potential. All my life, life expectancies have risen, and discussions around health and well-being have not had to contend with endemic diseases of the sort that my grandparents generation faced.

It is right to be concerned about the impact of current policy on mental health, and the retreat into a single minded focus on conditions of the body rather than the mind is a disgrace. However, it is not right to act as though it's a one way bet; there will be significant costs as we as a population have to accommodate to changes in the impact our conduct as individuals may have on others, and their's on us.

If your premise is correct that herd immunity is impossible, that would presumably mean any vaccine would be barely effective as well. What then?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If your premise is correct that herd immunity is impossible, that would presumably mean any vaccine would be barely effective as well. What then?

Two choices - slow extinction, or restrictions forever.

 

[Ianno87]

Two choices - slow extinction, or restrictions forever.

Human extinction? I struggle to see how that's Mathematically possible with a mortality rate of "only" 2-4% or so.

 

[bramling]

Two choices - slow extinction, or restrictions forever.

How do you arrive at extinction? Surely what would happen is average life expectancy would be pared back by a small amount, assuming all other factors remain the same, and assuming there really are no longer term effects on younger people?

 

[yorkie]

If the latter, and it's not as though the possibility hasn't been signalled for a while, then herd immunity is, by definition, never going to be attainable. And that would mean that "letting it rip", a policy with a devilishly high price on it, wouldn't deliver the results it's proponents suggest as a trade-off.

What's your definition of "herd immunity", "letting it rip" and is there nothing in between?

To be clear: are you saying that if a vaccine isn't going to end this and we need restrictions indefinitely, to ensure that we never reach a level of immunity whereby restrictions can be lifted? If not, what are you saying?

 

[43066]

Two choices - slow extinction, or restrictions forever.

This is completely OTT.

The other option is that we all just grow up and accept the fact that, every hundred years or so, a pandemic comes along and wipes a few million people off the planet. The average Covid victim is in their 80s. Elderly and/or very ill people dying is unfortunately a fact of life.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It is perfectly normal human emotion to feel distress in sad times and feel frightened in uncertain times. The current situation is both sad for those suffering the effects of Covid-related issues- physical and/or fiscal- and is frightening because we don't know what will happen next or how long it will last for.

Feeling sad and frightened in these times is not a mental health problem, and it does nobody any favours trying to pathologise away normal human emotion.

Of course the added uncertainty and distress may well make existing mental health conditions worse.

The answer is that, yes, the fact that lockdowns and their effects are distressing is taken into account. Medical professionals are well aware that lockdown and isolation are hugely distressing for many people. But so is watching loved ones die of Covid. And there is no easy way of juggling these competing demands.