The rise in suicides is entirely mythological: https://slate.com/technology/2020/11/whats-actually-happening-with-suicide-during-the-pandemic.html https://slate

The rise in suicides is entirely mythological: https://slate.com/technology/2020/11/whats-actually-happening-with-suicide-during-the-pandemic.html https://slate.com/technology/2020/11/whats-actually-happenin.... It not being a factor in the decision-making process is, therefore, rather appropriate. As to economic damage and the general impact on well-being, it seems blatantly untrue to state that they are not considered. The fact alone that these lockdowns were often lifted rather early indicates as much. The term itself isn't very helpful because it can mean anything to anybody, and in almost no case has it meant what I would usually assume the meaning of the term to be: actual curfews. Instead, each jurisdiction has tried to find a set of restrictions that, ideally, would be low-impact but be strongly effective. It's well-documented by now that these measures tend to work well, in aggregate. Unfortunately, the data isn't quite as good for any individual measure. And the likely contenders for top efficacy are also the most hurtful. Closing schools is the undisputed leader here: it's mighty effective but makes life miserable for children and parents alike.