5 ms·

Makes you think that COVID "helped" expose a lot of what was already wrong with our society (globally) over the past 2 years. In this case (underage suicide) s

Makes you think that COVID "helped" expose a lot of what was already wrong with our society (globally) over the past 2 years. In this case (underage suicide) specifically, some factors would be depression and domestic violence due to mandated isolation. Forcing abusive parents to spend time with their children, and having children who are depressed or were on the verge of depression, enter a state of desperation that could lead to suicide rates spiking. A depressive topic in itself. PS: Should note that these are just two of the most likely reasons for the increase in children suicide, but not the only.

throw8932894 5y ago
Helped? If you isolate kid from its friends for 18 months and imprison it in small room, it will become suicidal. There is no need for abusive parents. Lockdowns themselfs are evil!
- dartharva 5y ago
  Shitposting about child suicides now? Very mature.
- elcamino44 5y ago
  It’s probably worth noting that Japan hasn’t had that kind of lockdown. Schools, after school activities, etc for most part have continued throughout the pandemic.
  - 0des 5y ago
    When you say "for the most part", what do you mean?
    - elcamino44 5y ago
      There was a period of extended school holidays last year due to the pandemic. Also some schools did suspend after school care and extracurricular activities during the states of emergency. The details probably vary widely across the country and no doubt people have been impacted, but remote schooling hasn’t really been a thing (as far as I know).
      - 0des 5y ago
        Thank you for the reply and clarification. I think I understand what is being said. Initially, I parsed the statement to mean that only a small fraction of schools closed.
  - Markoff 5y ago
    that's not what article says: "Also, a record high of over 190,000 students of elementary and junior high schools stopped attending."
- watwut 5y ago
  Is it necessary to constantly lie about what kind of lockdowns various countries had?
AndrewBissell 5y ago
This just seems like a euphemistic way of saying that lockdowns made a lot of bad problems worse. When they were implemented there were plenty of voices warning at the time that they would cause children to suffer more abuse, depression, and suicide.
- frockington1 5y ago
  Depression, suicide, drug abuse, supply shortages, inflation, people not returning to the workforce. A year ago you would have been cancelled for daring to voice negative consequences to lockdowns
  - School-Cotton 5y ago
    Yep, the prevailing narrative was “all these negative effects are bad, but at least they’re not death!” which totally ignores the probabilistic nature of the set of outcomes. An x% chance of something bad happening to you might indeed be worse than a y% chance of death, depending on the values of x and y — but this sort of analysis was (and still is) totally missing from mainstream acceptable discussion of our response to Covid.
    - logicalmonster 5y ago
      My very firm belief is that many "official experts" have at least 4 big problems/weaknesses when it comes to making decisions and communicating with the public. * They're trying to optimize for 2 (sometimes) contradictory problems: getting the right answer AND maintaining their job/power. A random bloke on the Internet just is trying to optimize for 1 problem, getting the right answer: any other considerations like fielding off hungry young political competitors or maintaining corporate stock prices so you stay in their good graces aren't factors in the slightest to a random well-intentioned smart guy on the Internet. * They are very smart at their field of expertise, but they're specialists and not generalists. They are very bad at considering second-order effects outside of their narrow field of expertise. Something like a lockdown in some city might indeed immediately save 1,000 extra people from a Covid death. Any risk-benefit analysis and deeper consideration of that lockdown on other problems such as drug/alcohol abuse and overdose deaths, suicides and hopelessness and depression, obesity increases leading to many health problems and deaths later on, deaths caused by missed cancer screenings and other medical problems, loss of freedom, or its economic impact and long-term impact on society isn't even a consideration by officialdom. Maybe 1,000 people are saved to kill 2,000 and cause even further societal problems. Yet those 1,000 deaths saved would be characterized as a win and proof that lockdowns work because no other factors can be considered. I'd strongly argue that a smart engineer or CEO (professions who are trained to considering multiple factors and tradeoffs in complex decision-making) would be better suited to make these kinds of complex societal decisions than a scientist focused on a narrow field. * They're frighteningly bad at normal risk-management calculations. One could make a very reasonable argument that a normal fit 0 to 40 year old shouldn't get a new vaccine which has no long-term test data for an illness that statistically has a very low risk for them: and many people are reasonably making that risk-management calculation. Yet many experts are rushing into advocating vaccines even for children despite no long-term test data. The risk management calculation for a vaccine in this circumstance is completely different for the old and young, yet no consideration of this is allowed. * Even when they sometimes get things right, most of what what even well-informed members of the public hear from the experts is filtered through the media. Unfortunately, outside of a handful of decent journalists who are reasonably smart and understand nuance (and who are mostly shunned from mainstream outlets) there is no collection of stupider people on the planet to try and analyze complex subjects or ask scientists real questions.
mbg721 5y ago
So is COVID a health crisis, or just a springboard to force societal change? This is why there's so much chaos and distrust.
EricE 5y ago
The real crime? Lockdowns didn't change a darned thing - I wish I could say I'm amazed the press doesn't talk about Sweden at all; sadly at this point I expect them to be biased and interested at protecting the current political narrative more than actually doing their jobs. Context: https://fee.org/articles/sweden-s-top-infectious-disease-expert-says-covid-19-lockdowns-are-not-based-on-science-history-shows-he-could-be-right/ https://fee.org/articles/sweden-s-top-infectious-disease-exp...
- somehowlinux 5y ago
  Your article is too old. https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-covid-no-lockdown-strategy-failed-higher-death-rate-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-covid-no-lockdown-str...
  - hajile 5y ago
    Sweden’s vaccination rates (75% with another 5-10% having the first shot) are not really lower than surrounding countries. No reason to lock down at that point unless the vaccine is ineffective.

throw8932894 5y ago

Helped? If you isolate kid from its friends for 18 months and imprison it in small room, it will become suicidal. There is no need for abusive parents. Lockdowns themselfs are evil!

dartharva 5y ago
Shitposting about child suicides now? Very mature.
elcamino44 5y ago
It’s probably worth noting that Japan hasn’t had that kind of lockdown. Schools, after school activities, etc for most part have continued throughout the pandemic.
- 0des 5y ago
  When you say "for the most part", what do you mean?
  - elcamino44 5y ago
    There was a period of extended school holidays last year due to the pandemic. Also some schools did suspend after school care and extracurricular activities during the states of emergency. The details probably vary widely across the country and no doubt people have been impacted, but remote schooling hasn’t really been a thing (as far as I know).
    - 0des 5y ago
      Thank you for the reply and clarification. I think I understand what is being said. Initially, I parsed the statement to mean that only a small fraction of schools closed.
- Markoff 5y ago
  that's not what article says: "Also, a record high of over 190,000 students of elementary and junior high schools stopped attending."
watwut 5y ago
Is it necessary to constantly lie about what kind of lockdowns various countries had?

AndrewBissell 5y ago

This just seems like a euphemistic way of saying that lockdowns made a lot of bad problems worse. When they were implemented there were plenty of voices warning at the time that they would cause children to suffer more abuse, depression, and suicide.

frockington1 5y ago
Depression, suicide, drug abuse, supply shortages, inflation, people not returning to the workforce. A year ago you would have been cancelled for daring to voice negative consequences to lockdowns
- School-Cotton 5y ago
  Yep, the prevailing narrative was “all these negative effects are bad, but at least they’re not death!” which totally ignores the probabilistic nature of the set of outcomes. An x% chance of something bad happening to you might indeed be worse than a y% chance of death, depending on the values of x and y — but this sort of analysis was (and still is) totally missing from mainstream acceptable discussion of our response to Covid.
  - logicalmonster 5y ago
    My very firm belief is that many "official experts" have at least 4 big problems/weaknesses when it comes to making decisions and communicating with the public. * They're trying to optimize for 2 (sometimes) contradictory problems: getting the right answer AND maintaining their job/power. A random bloke on the Internet just is trying to optimize for 1 problem, getting the right answer: any other considerations like fielding off hungry young political competitors or maintaining corporate stock prices so you stay in their good graces aren't factors in the slightest to a random well-intentioned smart guy on the Internet. * They are very smart at their field of expertise, but they're specialists and not generalists. They are very bad at considering second-order effects outside of their narrow field of expertise. Something like a lockdown in some city might indeed immediately save 1,000 extra people from a Covid death. Any risk-benefit analysis and deeper consideration of that lockdown on other problems such as drug/alcohol abuse and overdose deaths, suicides and hopelessness and depression, obesity increases leading to many health problems and deaths later on, deaths caused by missed cancer screenings and other medical problems, loss of freedom, or its economic impact and long-term impact on society isn't even a consideration by officialdom. Maybe 1,000 people are saved to kill 2,000 and cause even further societal problems. Yet those 1,000 deaths saved would be characterized as a win and proof that lockdowns work because no other factors can be considered. I'd strongly argue that a smart engineer or CEO (professions who are trained to considering multiple factors and tradeoffs in complex decision-making) would be better suited to make these kinds of complex societal decisions than a scientist focused on a narrow field. * They're frighteningly bad at normal risk-management calculations. One could make a very reasonable argument that a normal fit 0 to 40 year old shouldn't get a new vaccine which has no long-term test data for an illness that statistically has a very low risk for them: and many people are reasonably making that risk-management calculation. Yet many experts are rushing into advocating vaccines even for children despite no long-term test data. The risk management calculation for a vaccine in this circumstance is completely different for the old and young, yet no consideration of this is allowed. * Even when they sometimes get things right, most of what what even well-informed members of the public hear from the experts is filtered through the media. Unfortunately, outside of a handful of decent journalists who are reasonably smart and understand nuance (and who are mostly shunned from mainstream outlets) there is no collection of stupider people on the planet to try and analyze complex subjects or ask scientists real questions.

mbg721 5y ago

So is COVID a health crisis, or just a springboard to force societal change? This is why there's so much chaos and distrust.

EricE 5y ago

The real crime? Lockdowns didn't change a darned thing - I wish I could say I'm amazed the press doesn't talk about Sweden at all; sadly at this point I expect them to be biased and interested at protecting the current political narrative more than actually doing their jobs. Context: https://fee.org/articles/sweden-s-top-infectious-disease-expert-says-covid-19-lockdowns-are-not-based-on-science-history-shows-he-could-be-right/ https://fee.org/articles/sweden-s-top-infectious-disease-exp...

somehowlinux 5y ago
Your article is too old. https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-covid-no-lockdown-strategy-failed-higher-death-rate-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-covid-no-lockdown-str...
- hajile 5y ago
  Sweden’s vaccination rates (75% with another 5-10% having the first shot) are not really lower than surrounding countries. No reason to lock down at that point unless the vaccine is ineffective.