long and interesting article about psychological effects

[IAintentDead]

Not a rant as the the 'clickbait' title suggests but, agree or disagree, it makes very interesting (and scary) reading.

thecritic.co.uk/the-lockdown-lobotomy/

1. The starting statement:

"In the real world, back in May, a JP Morgan report found that, in the vast majority of cases, a country’s coronavirus infection rate actually decreased once the lockdown had ended. " No study to underpin this and just by looking at data it seems to be very false.

1. The actual wording: we should not be socially distancing, but PHYSICALLY.

I have had more time to actually have chats via phone/net with friend -- thus my social life didn't get damaged.

1. "Face masks, meanwhile, are simply an extension of lockdown to the outside world – they serve to keep us socially and psychologically distanced from our fellow man."

No. They serve to save droplets from entering into another person's airways. Why would they be socially distancing? It's blown out of porportion.

1. I could quote the original Cooper, 1999 thesis, but read the excerpt for yourself. Again: the journalist? took out what fit his narrative.

strathprints.strath.ac.uk/43402/

All in all - this is just a shit piece that looks valid because of all the references. But deep down it is supporting a narrative that people want to hear in this paper.

"But deep down it is supporting a narrative that people want to hear in this paper."

On the contrary, I'd say that, judging from Mumsnet, 'people' want to hear the complete opposite and are inclined to use spurious arguments to denigrate any attempt to put the case in the article.

For example I find the idea that phone calls are any substitute for face-to-face interaction, especially for more than a few weeks, shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the need of many humans for interaction.

An interesting article. A lot of which I agree with.

Indeed, amicissimma. Phone and zoom etc calls are no genuine substitute for normal human interaction at all. They just about keep things ticking over for a while until people can interact normally. I'm astounded that more people don't see that.

Human beings are innately social, they naturally tend to gravitate towards each other, even when they don't know one another. You can see that in the way people from different groups tend to sit nearish to each other on empty beaches and in parks etc, and the way people in car parks park often park near each other.

And people crave the physical presence of people they know and love. So it's just nonsense to suggest that 'social' distancing isn't harmful long term, and that it isn't a problem when masks hide facial expressions or stop people from talking to each other normally. On the contrary these things are hugely psychologically damaging.

And they say people worried about schools re-opening are hysterical

Oh and looky see, the author was lead psychologist at Cambridge Analytica. Yes I am 100% sure he has our best interests at heart

And do you know if the psych was personally implicated in wrong doing?

And I'm not seeing any hysteria personally....

No hysteria?

The title? "Lockdown Lobotomy"

"masks are chiefly worn by anarchists, criminals and perverts." Tell that to doctors, nurses, dentists, cyclists...

Apparently supporting masks, social distancing etc or criticising those who don't is akin to a Puritan witch hunt or the kind of banality of evil that drove Nazism. "That is not to say they are evil in the traditional sense – rather, they are participating in what is known as banal or everyday evil."

"we are sleepwalking into a totalitarian nightmare. A section of society has been screaming about fascism since Brexit, but now fascism has actually arrived, and they are cheering it on."