Did the benefits of lockdown outweigh the harm to children’s education?

[PoisedKhakiUser]

AIBU to ask whether the benefits of lockdown - saving lives and protecting health - outweighed the damage it did to children’s education and future life chances? I feel like kids lost out on so much during this time, and I wonder if the cost was too high.

I think it really depended on what area you worked in.

But the way that certain things were ignored, as if COVID was the only thing, was crazy. Cancer treatment and diagnosis for example - and I don't mean screenings, I mean people who needed to go see a doctor for an observed issue.

I know of a girl who went blind because no one looked into her eyes when she was having vision problems, all her treatments were virtual, until it was too late.

Where my parents lived, (not the UK) they stopped screening pregnant women for STIs so the labs could do COVID tests.

It was as if only one kind of health issues mattered.

How old are the residents in this home?

Te idea that an earlier lockdown would be shorter only makes sense if that would mean the virus would go away, or be knoocked down to such a degree it wouldn't just ramp right up again.

That's not the case. To the extent that lockdowns slowed it down, as soon as people started going out again it just ramped back up, because it never went down that far. In the end wherever it appeared, in the end it just went around the population and eventually became endemic, Because the end, everyone had to start living normally again.

There was no way it was every going to be totally suppressed in the population that was never in the cards. I always wondered why people thought that was a possibility? For all the bad messaging in public health I don't really remember anyone saying that would happen.

I don’t have that info, how could I? mum is 93.

Vulnerable to the worst outcomes of contracting Covid-19, ie. death? Not exclusively, the elderly too.

Lockdown was essential not only for preventing deaths from Covid and the development of Long Covid (which has struck down some young and healthy people), but also in stopping hospitals being overwhelmed so that people couldn't be treated for other conditions. Without lockdown there would have been carnage. So YABU.

Lots of people weren’t treated for other conditions!

I think Long COVID has become yet another invisible illness that is abused by those that don't want to work.

10% of the unsackable Civil Service claim to have it vs 3.3% of the general population.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/31/twice-as-many-civil-servants-long-covid-national-average/

Battling symptoms four weeks after getting the virus? Surely that's normal after any nasty virus. Four weeks is nothing.

There was no way it was every going to be totally suppressed in the population that was never in the cards. I always wondered why people thought that was a possibility? For all the bad messaging in public health I don't really remember anyone saying that would happen.
This is the problem with politicians promising miracles: people believe them. Boris Johnson who never tells a lie said "with twelve weeks of lockdown, we can send the virus packing". Ditto Sunak's "I can stop the boats". It's why it's a relief to me that Starmer is not promising miracles all the time (another debate, I know).

No because we didn’t fanny around making a fuss in front of the children that they were missing out on anything. I can see that some children would have been impacted everyone’s situations are different. But what I also saw was a lot of adults projecting their concerns/ vulnerabilities at that time onto their children.

I remember three weeks to flatten the curve and all the bad poetry about when Boris lets us out in 3 weeks time. What a hoot that was! I wish I could find the poem but it seems to have been erased from the internet.

I feel that mistakes were made but based on the information available at the time, difficult decisions had to be made and I wouldn't like to have been the one making those decisions as it's damned if you do and damned if you don't and i'm not sure how things could have been done differently in many sectors at that time.

I think he is actually. ‘Smash the gangs’ is a prime one

I would have preferred a different approach though to Covid as the damage has been high

I did catch an excellent piece by Sir David Spiegelhalter at the weekend on the best public messaging in five steps

He references someone else in a new book he’s written. It made absolute sense and part of the problem was the media shouting u turn when new info came to light.

A key part for him is allowing the messaging to say this is what we know now to get through, and it can change

I agree. The ONS use that definition for long covid, and I presume they have some reason, but it's not immediately obvious.

I think the initial messaging was extreme foreboding to make people realise how serious it was, but also relied on the public (and the Police) to exercise some common sense which was sadly lacking.

As an NHS worker, I feel the 'protect the NHS' one was damaging and led to far too many people feeling like they shouldn't bother the NHS with their serious health problems as they had the idea that the entire NHS was on its knees dealing with covid when many areas had virtually empty hospitals for months on end and experienced crisis points later in the year towards winter when most people were generally annoyed by lockdowns, over it, doing what they wanted and thinking it should all be in hand by then.

Social media also played a part with the Drs/nurses in hard-hit areas making emotional pleas on FB, IG or Tiktok to everyone to stay at home (I don't agree with it), and as many people think the NHS is a monolith with everywhere experiencing the same problems when it simply is not the case, there was huge sympathy to anyone working in the NHS and the claps started.

Which of course, led to the fact that many people then 'turned' on the NHS when Drs/nurses in quiet areas were posting Tiktoks of group dances etc (which I don't think they should have done) and people were saying why are we clapping for this and on and on..

And social media including MN played a part in the initial online discourse when people with very real reasons to travel, have a family member leave their area to come stay with them with very little if no infection risk, had a health concern they needed to be checked out by GP etc were told to not be selfish Granny-killers and stay the f* home just because they might get into a very unlikely car accident on virtually empty streets and burden the NHS. When many areas of the UK had empty hospitals and the staff had very little to do.

So covid was the only thing that matters? What about all the people who were at risk of death due to their mental health difficulties? Why isn't that seen as one of the worst outcomes?

I never said that.

To be clear, the OP ask for opinions on whether people thought the lockdowns were worth the cost to children's education, it is my opinion that they were and my response was to the OP.

At no point have I asked you for your opinion.

Take this elsewhere.

I don't think so. I think the lockdowns did massive damage in many areas. To children's schooling,and especially to the economy.

We were all going to get Covid but we couldn't all get it at the same time.

The government had to find a way to slow down it s progress through the population.

Lockdowns were the method they selected.
You can argue all and night about whether thet got this right, whether the timings were right etc. But they had to slow it down as it had the potential to overwhelm the NHS. That would have been bad on a national scale. It wasn't just about the elderly.

That particular care home very much bucks the trend of the majority. I actually looked up the average stay length for care homes during lockdowns. It was under 2 years, around 18 months if I remember correctly. And the only way the majority of these residents come out is feet first sadly.

A friend who worked in one, commented that at least once a week they had a death before covid.

If you looked at the hospitalisation figures alongside deaths, it became abundantly clear early on that the people it affected badly were the elderly or ones with underlying illness.

We kept being told of an NHS under stress, some places perhaps were. But a great many places had NHS staff on furlough or empty wards with nurses having time to make up silly dances.

Wasent the often mentioned tik tok dance actually American ?
Maybe some staff were furlough,but why then were they asking for staff that had retired etc to come back(
And they were also ,employing students thst were months away from qualifying to fill in the gaps
There probably were some quiet areas ,but the general public were not allowed to just wander around ,critical care units .

I think the difference might be between care home and nursing home. The residents in mum’s home pre and post Covid, were all there for a long time.

If the residents had all been there a long time, it would suggest that a large number were already on borrowed time.

I'm sorry, but I don't think we should be locking down the entire country so that people in care homes can potentially live another couple of years.