I suspect now that the election has passed and Biden is president, there is going to be a strong push to reopen the economy and support for ”focused protection” will suddenly skyrocket.
The first rule of medicine is to do no harm. To harm millions of people and kill thousands to save people from a illness (even if you say that these measures help) is a very big mistake.
This is so vague.
Do you expect to close all bars, restaurant, venues until further notice and let thousands of business die while also putting millions into poverty while increasing depression and suicide rates?
There is a tremendous element of morbidity to the mental health aspect as well, not just mortality.
I see a lot of arguments that are along the lines of the only negative outcome of COVID is death, and anything short of that doesn't deserve to be considered. I read your argument as being structured in a similar way.
There are really bad things happening both with the mental health impact of this whole thing, as well as the impact of the virus itself. They're both tragic, and serious, and we need to be thinking about both.
I'm not saying that you're not on-board with this argument, and I'm not saying you are. I just wanted to add this to the discussion for discussion's sake.
The experience in Melbourne (Victoria Australia) has been interesting. They locked down for a number of months and have got effective control of the virus, with 9 days no infection so far since lifting movement restrictions. There has been a lot of concern about peoples mental health and money is being spent both on highlighting the problem as well as making sure people are aware of services available. My understanding is that the services are under pressure, but coping.
Lockdown is going to cause secondary social, health and economic problems, but if you can do it well and get control of the virus then you gain flexibility to deal with the secondary problems. If you don't control the virus, you will end up with those other problems as well as the out of control virus.
This is a no win situation. If you aren't lucky enough to live in an isolated country and avoid the problem from the start, something that only worked for some of the really isolated island nations, then you have to move hard and fast to control the virus and hope to deal with the flow on problems once you have the immediate threat under control.
Problem is actually you don’t because unless the virus is completely eliminated it can only be controlled using infinite lockdowns, or it’ll simply flare up again and every sacrifice will be wasted.
That is the problem. Indeed unless you plan on doing the job properly I would question the value of even trying. It requires a strong sense of purpose and a full communication with the public on what is being attempted. The good thing is that the infection pattern of this thing is pretty well understood at this stage so this should be possible.
The sad fact is there is basically no mental health service in the UK at all. The UK could be dealing with this and giving people in need appropriate care but lack of access to care has been a consistent theme for a decade. It is critically underfunded like everything else in the NHS and barely works even if people do get seen. In a functioning society the government would have anticipated the increased pressure that all this would have on people, especially loosing their jobs due economic impacts, and ensured there was an appropriate safety net. That didn't happen and it just adds to the despair. Many mentioned money worries, not a surprise given the economic havoc this pandemic is delivering.
It isn't just about lockdown or not, there is a whole range of options on how to do all of this and right now the UK government has chosen a lot of bad ways for bad reasons and left a lot of people with no hope. The mental health crisis in the UK has been worsening for a long time now and this is just another log on the fire.
Mental health services in my area are really good although I know that isn't that case nationwide.
Sure the NHS could provide better services if they had more money, but that has to be paid for by someone, somehow. The obvious way would be to increase taxes, but the government won't to that as it's political suicide to do so.
Just like the financial help that people expect from the government due the COVID crisis; everyone wants the government to spend more, with little thought on how they are supposed to fund that spending.
There's a recently announced £1.2bn funding for community MH services, to be delivered in a way that's less focussed on diagnosis and more on need.
There's strong regional variation in English MH services. This is because of the free market changes introduced by the Lansley reforms. We're struggling to move away from those in a way that doesn't destroy the NHS. All the work around ICSs and STPs should help a bit, especially if NHSE+I start to devolve some of the specialist commissioning budget to local services.
I consider myself to be emotionally stable, but since the lockdowns started, I have been on border of being depressed, almost every day. I have a great family, but I have to work from home now, and my 4 kids are also home all day. Playgrounds have been closed for months. I feel like I am not the same person as I used to be anymore because of these lockdowns. I can totally see how people can become very depressed in this environment.
> As we go back into #lockdown, it’s right to be concerned about #mentalhealth & alert to the risks, wrong to frighten people with dire predictions, to quote evidence selectively, to claim mental health as cover for ideological opposition.
> News reporting of the pandemic should not add to suicide risk - alarming predictions about suicide rates are of particular concern. Important message to media & people they quote, authors inc Keith Hawton & @samaritans
.
17 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 49.8 ms ] threadI see a lot of arguments that are along the lines of the only negative outcome of COVID is death, and anything short of that doesn't deserve to be considered. I read your argument as being structured in a similar way.
There are really bad things happening both with the mental health impact of this whole thing, as well as the impact of the virus itself. They're both tragic, and serious, and we need to be thinking about both.
I'm not saying that you're not on-board with this argument, and I'm not saying you are. I just wanted to add this to the discussion for discussion's sake.
Lockdown is going to cause secondary social, health and economic problems, but if you can do it well and get control of the virus then you gain flexibility to deal with the secondary problems. If you don't control the virus, you will end up with those other problems as well as the out of control virus.
This is a no win situation. If you aren't lucky enough to live in an isolated country and avoid the problem from the start, something that only worked for some of the really isolated island nations, then you have to move hard and fast to control the virus and hope to deal with the flow on problems once you have the immediate threat under control.
It isn't just about lockdown or not, there is a whole range of options on how to do all of this and right now the UK government has chosen a lot of bad ways for bad reasons and left a lot of people with no hope. The mental health crisis in the UK has been worsening for a long time now and this is just another log on the fire.
Sure the NHS could provide better services if they had more money, but that has to be paid for by someone, somehow. The obvious way would be to increase taxes, but the government won't to that as it's political suicide to do so.
Just like the financial help that people expect from the government due the COVID crisis; everyone wants the government to spend more, with little thought on how they are supposed to fund that spending.
They're usually terrible. (Winterbourne View, Whorlton Hall, St Andrews: all private providers).
There's strong regional variation in English MH services. This is because of the free market changes introduced by the Lansley reforms. We're struggling to move away from those in a way that doesn't destroy the NHS. All the work around ICSs and STPs should help a bit, especially if NHSE+I start to devolve some of the specialist commissioning budget to local services.
https://twitter.com/ProfLAppleby/status/1323563373502603264?...
> As we go back into #lockdown, it’s right to be concerned about #mentalhealth & alert to the risks, wrong to frighten people with dire predictions, to quote evidence selectively, to claim mental health as cover for ideological opposition.
https://twitter.com/ProfLAppleby/status/1325406591307444225?...
> We need to acknowledge the anxiety people feel in a pandemic without alarming predictions on mental health that could add to risk.
> So please, no more "tsunami" or "suicide epidemic".
> https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0...
https://twitter.com/ProfLAppleby/status/1324697434824581120?...
> News reporting of the pandemic should not add to suicide risk - alarming predictions about suicide rates are of particular concern. Important message to media & people they quote, authors inc Keith Hawton & @samaritans .