7 ms·

I think something that gets lost in the concern about COVID is how many addicts and people struggling with mental health are being killed indirectly by these qu

I think something that gets lost in the concern about COVID is how many addicts and people struggling with mental health are being killed indirectly by these quarantines. I don't have an easy answer of course, it's a serious virus, but while for a normal person these shutdowns are depressing, for addicts these shutdowns can be indirect death sentences. I really think that needs to get factored into these decisions.

lazyasciiart 6y ago
Fortunately it is being factored into these decisions, and has been publicly discussed for about nine months now as a consideration. What makes you think it's getting lost? https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/26/health/coronavirus-alcoholics-drugs-online.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/26/health/coronavirus-alcoho...
- downandout 6y ago
  Given the extreme conditions being imposed in certain states, it certainly is not being factored into these decisions uniformly by all governors. There are states that are using reason and common sense. But look at California for example. When you have Sheriffs in virtually every major county directly and publicly refusing to enforce your orders, perhaps you have gone too far [1]. [1] https://ktla.com/news/local-news/riverside-county-sheriff-slams-gov-newsom-vows-not-to-enforce-lockdown-order/ https://ktla.com/news/local-news/riverside-county-sheriff-sl...
  - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
    That's a weakness of allowing elected police chiefs who may be doing this for political reasons and not considering their duty to protect the public.
    - downandout 6y ago
      That’s pretty cynical. A more likely explanation might be that police agencies have limited resources, and and as a result have to prioritize their enforcement activities for actual crimes. There simply aren’t enough police, jails, or courts to arrest random people for leaving their homes with a mask on. Further, by advocating for aggressive enforcement, you are also advocating for the ultimate super spreader event: filling jails with people that don’t belong there, where the virus already runs rampant. Most of these people would be booked in, get the virus, and then bail out or be released by a judge a few days later. Then, they would take the virus out into the community and spread it further. These restrictions are a fun exercise in virtue signaling, but are impractical and actually enforcing them would increase the spread of the virus.
      - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
        Given the behaviour of US police forces that has come to light (or ben more exposed recently) - its a reasonable position.
  - lazyasciiart 6y ago
    You disagree with their conclusions and are using that as proof that they are not including this data in their decision making. That's a poor argument, weakened even further by the various announcements and resources Newsom specifically has made about impacts on mental health and newly created helplines and recommendations - which make it clear that he is well aware of this effect.
wutbrodo 6y ago
> something that gets lost in the concern about COVID I don't know if I'd describe it as passively as "getting lost". Very visible people have been talking about it, including the outgoing President, who mentioned the mental health costs of lockdown multiple times. Leaving aside the fact that even true things that Trump says are discounted due to his lunacy, most people are too dim to understand the concept of trade-offs, so anything that gives "aid and comfort to the enemy" is systematically downplayed among most of those that are pro-Covid-restrictions (I say all of this as someone who think that restrictions have tragic costs but are necessary). That is to say, the problem isn't that no one has thought of factoring this into decisions, it's that the discourse upstream of policy is driven largely by the majority of voters that don't actually care about pandemic policy as anything other than another wedge issue to fight pre-existing cultural/religious wars over.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
jacobolus 6y ago
The virus itself is doing far more to damage mental health than stay-at-home orders ever will. Around the world, we’re talking about millions of grieving people who have lost parents, siblings, spouses, children, friends, coworkers, .... Millions more people who struggled to stay breathing and may now suffer severe long-term (or maybe permanent) symptoms. Health care workers around the world who will have PTSD from harrowing shifts treating an extremely high load of unbelievably sick people for month after month. Etc. In places with significant community spread, people are rightfully afraid that anything they do around other people is exposing them to significant risk of severe illness or death. Even people who take every precaution sometimes turn up sick, and the sources can be hard to trace. Dealing with that for months is extremely stressful. All while a significant part of the population continued to blithely party on as if their actions had no consequences, and “leaders” baldly lie about it day after day, month after month. If we want people to return to normal life feeling free and safe, then controlling the virus must be the #1 priority. Indeed, in places where the virus was controlled via strong leadership and community solidarity, life is nearly back to normal; in places where leadership was absent, it will continue to be a horror show for many more months.
- _-___________-_ 6y ago
  I'm not sure if you genuinely believe the extreme hyperbole in the second paragraph of your post or if you're just trying to counteract the people who act like the virus is nothing at all. If it's the former, you should probably find some more reliable information sources. If it's the latter, truth and accuracy are a better counterpoint than taking the opposite extreme of misinformation.
  - jacobolus 6y ago
    What do you think is the hyperbolic part? That millions of people have died and millions more were extremely sick is a simple statement of fact. As far as I can tell there is nothing even slightly controversial in what I wrote. Your response is a weird combination of vague and rude/patronizing. I’m not sure what your point is.
itisit 6y ago
Lost to some perhaps, however deaths of despair exacerbated by the situation surrounding this virus is a recognized and studied phenomenon.
Rebelgecko 6y ago
Based on the article, it doesn't sound like he was actually living in isolation. He just chose to surround himself with a crowd that enabled selfdestructive behaviors.
- mlyle 6y ago
  A lot of the "normal" opportunities for socialization have evaporated, though, leaving only the lunacy and strange ones behind for many people.
  - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
    I first thought this "only abnormal people left to communicate" comment referred to online communities. But it could also refer to people who ignore the shut-downs and hang out in smaller groups regardless limits on gathering etc. In my country there is no clear distinction of what type of people make up the crowd which is "still" socializing. While you get some pockets of conspiracy theorists, covid-deniers, mixed with conservative or right-wing elements, the left, or even politically abstinent are also there. It doesn't make them all abnormal people. There are some who I have perfectly communicated before the pandemic. But the pandemic has made many people mentally struggle (without a need to lump them all together into "abnormal"). My guess is those who have already been (mentally) vulnerable are now even more so because the world around them is becoming even more depressive/depressed. It's not that there are only abnormal people left who to socialize with. It's because many just die because they were anyway hanging on to a bare minimum before. It doesn't require the presence of "abnormal" people to kill them. It's enough when a support structure that they previously had (a friend, a source of fund/support, etc) simply breaks away. it's not an addition that hurts them but something that is taken away. (so it's actually less complicated/complex/conspirational and more ugly/sad as to why this happens)
    - mlyle 6y ago
      I'm not saying that it's only lunatics that are left. The point I'd meant to make is that some people have 60-70% of their connection to eccentrics, online communities, etc. But they typically also have some contacts with work, from seeing family, when traveling, or chit-chatting with people at the store. Suddenly all of these other contacts are gone or much less frequent. And the "normal" people you talk to are, as you say, depressed and much less normal. I'm certainly in this boat to some extent.
ibejoeb 6y ago
> how many addicts and people struggling with mental health are being killed ...and how many new addicts and mental illnesses are being created
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  "The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence" https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30460-8/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... quarantine and flattening the curve is important imo, but the way governments go about it is not. there needs to be a parallel campaign educating people about the effects of quarantine - which are well researched. Also I highly recommend reading up on the psychological effects incarceration has on felons. Quarantined people aren't prisoners but there are parallels due to effects of isolation. Every re-socializing attempt of a prisoner even in the most "progressive" manner, has at its core idea to _first_ rob that person of their own agency. Isolation opens up minds to new ideas and to cause them question everything. What minds are being fed in such a state is absolutely crucial to how they're reorienting themselves and what they latch on-to. Isolation breaks everyone except the hardest psychopaths, which is why it's used in every society (since earliest civilizations) as an instrument of control. This lancet research paper isn't talking about felons but there are some hard to ignore parallels, maybe this is why politicians avoid the subject.
  - Tempest1981 6y ago
    > a parallel campaign educating people Although we have some subset of the US population that rebels against being educated. And many others who simply don't have the time, or interest, or intellectual curiousity. We get our education from social media.
bstar77 6y ago
I think it's insane to change policy intended to protect a huge segment of our vulnerable population to placate addicts. Addiction is a terrible thing (I've lost family members to it), but I'm not going to prioritize their needs over the needs of the elderly, essential workers, medical staff and high risk individuals.
- jgalt212 6y ago
  Fair enough, but it's not only addicts being adversely affected by the quarantines and lockdowns. I would go so far to say that everyone has been adversely affected by the lockdowns--it's just a question of how much and have these costs outweighed the benefits. Until recently, I'd it was pretty clear that Sweden (no lock-downs) and the US (many lockdowns of varying length and enforcment) have suffered the same per capita fatality rate.
  - lazyasciiart 6y ago
    Sweden changed course on that decision a couple weeks ago now, and has stricter rules than a lot of the US (no gatherings larger than 8 people, for example).
deeviant 6y ago
> I think something that gets lost... It's really not lost at all. Most people know about the secondary effects of the lockdown. Loss of jobs, loss of schooling, mental health effects. It's all front and center. The math is simple. Without lockdowns, millions die, so we lockdown to some degree. It's not that government officials are enacting lockdowns in a callous disregard of their negative effects, we simply have no other sane choice.

lazyasciiart 6y ago

Fortunately it is being factored into these decisions, and has been publicly discussed for about nine months now as a consideration. What makes you think it's getting lost? https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/26/health/coronavirus-alcoholics-drugs-online.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/26/health/coronavirus-alcoho...

downandout 6y ago
Given the extreme conditions being imposed in certain states, it certainly is not being factored into these decisions uniformly by all governors. There are states that are using reason and common sense. But look at California for example. When you have Sheriffs in virtually every major county directly and publicly refusing to enforce your orders, perhaps you have gone too far [1]. [1] https://ktla.com/news/local-news/riverside-county-sheriff-slams-gov-newsom-vows-not-to-enforce-lockdown-order/ https://ktla.com/news/local-news/riverside-county-sheriff-sl...
- Mauricebranagh 6y ago
  That's a weakness of allowing elected police chiefs who may be doing this for political reasons and not considering their duty to protect the public.
  - downandout 6y ago
    That’s pretty cynical. A more likely explanation might be that police agencies have limited resources, and and as a result have to prioritize their enforcement activities for actual crimes. There simply aren’t enough police, jails, or courts to arrest random people for leaving their homes with a mask on. Further, by advocating for aggressive enforcement, you are also advocating for the ultimate super spreader event: filling jails with people that don’t belong there, where the virus already runs rampant. Most of these people would be booked in, get the virus, and then bail out or be released by a judge a few days later. Then, they would take the virus out into the community and spread it further. These restrictions are a fun exercise in virtue signaling, but are impractical and actually enforcing them would increase the spread of the virus.
    - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
      Given the behaviour of US police forces that has come to light (or ben more exposed recently) - its a reasonable position.
- lazyasciiart 6y ago
  You disagree with their conclusions and are using that as proof that they are not including this data in their decision making. That's a poor argument, weakened even further by the various announcements and resources Newsom specifically has made about impacts on mental health and newly created helplines and recommendations - which make it clear that he is well aware of this effect.

wutbrodo 6y ago

> something that gets lost in the concern about COVID I don't know if I'd describe it as passively as "getting lost". Very visible people have been talking about it, including the outgoing President, who mentioned the mental health costs of lockdown multiple times. Leaving aside the fact that even true things that Trump says are discounted due to his lunacy, most people are too dim to understand the concept of trade-offs, so anything that gives "aid and comfort to the enemy" is systematically downplayed among most of those that are pro-Covid-restrictions (I say all of this as someone who think that restrictions have tragic costs but are necessary). That is to say, the problem isn't that no one has thought of factoring this into decisions, it's that the discourse upstream of policy is driven largely by the majority of voters that don't actually care about pandemic policy as anything other than another wedge issue to fight pre-existing cultural/religious wars over.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

jacobolus 6y ago

The virus itself is doing far more to damage mental health than stay-at-home orders ever will. Around the world, we’re talking about millions of grieving people who have lost parents, siblings, spouses, children, friends, coworkers, .... Millions more people who struggled to stay breathing and may now suffer severe long-term (or maybe permanent) symptoms. Health care workers around the world who will have PTSD from harrowing shifts treating an extremely high load of unbelievably sick people for month after month. Etc. In places with significant community spread, people are rightfully afraid that anything they do around other people is exposing them to significant risk of severe illness or death. Even people who take every precaution sometimes turn up sick, and the sources can be hard to trace. Dealing with that for months is extremely stressful. All while a significant part of the population continued to blithely party on as if their actions had no consequences, and “leaders” baldly lie about it day after day, month after month. If we want people to return to normal life feeling free and safe, then controlling the virus must be the #1 priority. Indeed, in places where the virus was controlled via strong leadership and community solidarity, life is nearly back to normal; in places where leadership was absent, it will continue to be a horror show for many more months.

_-___________-_ 6y ago
I'm not sure if you genuinely believe the extreme hyperbole in the second paragraph of your post or if you're just trying to counteract the people who act like the virus is nothing at all. If it's the former, you should probably find some more reliable information sources. If it's the latter, truth and accuracy are a better counterpoint than taking the opposite extreme of misinformation.
- jacobolus 6y ago
  What do you think is the hyperbolic part? That millions of people have died and millions more were extremely sick is a simple statement of fact. As far as I can tell there is nothing even slightly controversial in what I wrote. Your response is a weird combination of vague and rude/patronizing. I’m not sure what your point is.

itisit 6y ago

Lost to some perhaps, however deaths of despair exacerbated by the situation surrounding this virus is a recognized and studied phenomenon.

Rebelgecko 6y ago

Based on the article, it doesn't sound like he was actually living in isolation. He just chose to surround himself with a crowd that enabled selfdestructive behaviors.

mlyle 6y ago
A lot of the "normal" opportunities for socialization have evaporated, though, leaving only the lunacy and strange ones behind for many people.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  I first thought this "only abnormal people left to communicate" comment referred to online communities. But it could also refer to people who ignore the shut-downs and hang out in smaller groups regardless limits on gathering etc. In my country there is no clear distinction of what type of people make up the crowd which is "still" socializing. While you get some pockets of conspiracy theorists, covid-deniers, mixed with conservative or right-wing elements, the left, or even politically abstinent are also there. It doesn't make them all abnormal people. There are some who I have perfectly communicated before the pandemic. But the pandemic has made many people mentally struggle (without a need to lump them all together into "abnormal"). My guess is those who have already been (mentally) vulnerable are now even more so because the world around them is becoming even more depressive/depressed. It's not that there are only abnormal people left who to socialize with. It's because many just die because they were anyway hanging on to a bare minimum before. It doesn't require the presence of "abnormal" people to kill them. It's enough when a support structure that they previously had (a friend, a source of fund/support, etc) simply breaks away. it's not an addition that hurts them but something that is taken away. (so it's actually less complicated/complex/conspirational and more ugly/sad as to why this happens)
  - mlyle 6y ago
    I'm not saying that it's only lunatics that are left. The point I'd meant to make is that some people have 60-70% of their connection to eccentrics, online communities, etc. But they typically also have some contacts with work, from seeing family, when traveling, or chit-chatting with people at the store. Suddenly all of these other contacts are gone or much less frequent. And the "normal" people you talk to are, as you say, depressed and much less normal. I'm certainly in this boat to some extent.

ibejoeb 6y ago

> how many addicts and people struggling with mental health are being killed ...and how many new addicts and mental illnesses are being created

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
"The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence" https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30460-8/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... quarantine and flattening the curve is important imo, but the way governments go about it is not. there needs to be a parallel campaign educating people about the effects of quarantine - which are well researched. Also I highly recommend reading up on the psychological effects incarceration has on felons. Quarantined people aren't prisoners but there are parallels due to effects of isolation. Every re-socializing attempt of a prisoner even in the most "progressive" manner, has at its core idea to _first_ rob that person of their own agency. Isolation opens up minds to new ideas and to cause them question everything. What minds are being fed in such a state is absolutely crucial to how they're reorienting themselves and what they latch on-to. Isolation breaks everyone except the hardest psychopaths, which is why it's used in every society (since earliest civilizations) as an instrument of control. This lancet research paper isn't talking about felons but there are some hard to ignore parallels, maybe this is why politicians avoid the subject.
- Tempest1981 6y ago
  > a parallel campaign educating people Although we have some subset of the US population that rebels against being educated. And many others who simply don't have the time, or interest, or intellectual curiousity. We get our education from social media.

bstar77 6y ago

I think it's insane to change policy intended to protect a huge segment of our vulnerable population to placate addicts. Addiction is a terrible thing (I've lost family members to it), but I'm not going to prioritize their needs over the needs of the elderly, essential workers, medical staff and high risk individuals.

jgalt212 6y ago
Fair enough, but it's not only addicts being adversely affected by the quarantines and lockdowns. I would go so far to say that everyone has been adversely affected by the lockdowns--it's just a question of how much and have these costs outweighed the benefits. Until recently, I'd it was pretty clear that Sweden (no lock-downs) and the US (many lockdowns of varying length and enforcment) have suffered the same per capita fatality rate.
- lazyasciiart 6y ago
  Sweden changed course on that decision a couple weeks ago now, and has stricter rules than a lot of the US (no gatherings larger than 8 people, for example).

deeviant 6y ago

> I think something that gets lost... It's really not lost at all. Most people know about the secondary effects of the lockdown. Loss of jobs, loss of schooling, mental health effects. It's all front and center. The math is simple. Without lockdowns, millions die, so we lockdown to some degree. It's not that government officials are enacting lockdowns in a callous disregard of their negative effects, we simply have no other sane choice.