4 ms·
Porque no los dos? Lockdowns are disruptive (surely nobody could disagree with that); pandemics are disruptive (again, presumably nobody disagrees). The importa
by Smaug123 6y ago
Porque no los dos? Lockdowns are disruptive (surely nobody could disagree with that); pandemics are disruptive (again, presumably nobody disagrees). The important question is to what extent the population is disrupted in the "lockdown" and "non-lockdown" scenarios, and what costs the society pays in human death, a collapsed economy, long-term health effects etc in the two cases.
A reasonable discussion has to start by accepting that every course of action is shitty here! The task is to weigh up the amount of shit and the different qualities of the shit down each pathway; it'll help nobody to claim that one pathway is shining and clean.
- slg 6y ago>Porque no los dos? Fine, then mention both. The comment I was replying to blamed it all on the lockdowns even though the problem would exist without lockdowns.
- Smaug123 6y agoI really don't think it did: > I think the more important point, somewhat ironically made on HN, is the critical effects of sleeplessness and promoting healthy sleep as a national public health priority. It seems to me this is just another pernicious example of how lockdowns and disrupting a population’s routines directly and indirectly damages public health. Does this really blame it all on lockdowns? All I see is "lockdowns are damaging", which is certainly true whatever your political beliefs.
- slg 6y ago>another pernicious example of how lockdowns and disrupting a population’s routines There is not even a hint in the comment that there is another cause to this disruptions besides lockdowns.