Lock Downs - Do you think they were necessary?

[ladycody, BSN, RN]

Do you think the lock downs were necessary? I personally do. We were so overwhelmed with patients and that was WITH measures in place to reduce spread.  I know people, however, (including some in health-care but not those that were on the front line of Covid) that think it was all a bunch of BS and should never have been implemented.  Looking for thoughts from others in the field that saw what it did to hospitals and their staff. 

[No Stars In My Eyes]

Well, we all know what happened when all those various unmasked, unvaccinated crowds milled together : more Covid! So, yeh, I think it was a good idea for folks to stay away from other folks. Not fun, but yes, necessary.

[NRSKarenRN, BSN, RN]

Ran across this article today:

When Covid Came for Provincetown

Quote

In a vacation hot spot on Cape Cod, an ad hoc community proved that Americans can stifle large outbreaks—if they want to.

Those infected in Provincetown, Mass. last Summer, despite immunization,  practiced self isolation post finding out COVID positive upon return from vacation there--thus stopping further virus spread. 8 persons hospitalized, but no deaths.

Lock downs were part of effort to decrease virus spread and deaths at a time when there were no immunizations and effective treatment protocols.  Even then, the US has had 1 million+  COVID deaths since 3/2020.

Healthcare systems throughout  the country were stretched to their limits---over limits,  when COVID peaks hit them: insufficient staff (often out due to covid exposure/illness),  lobbys/PACU turned into nursing units.  Lack of resources: running out of IV fluids, steroids, meds, Oxygen tanks, ventilators,  morgues full so refrigerated trucks called in.   So lockdowns called for to prevent complete collapse of hospitals.

COVID Stats from the Presidents Daily Schedule 6/15/22

Quote

Coronavirus Cases and Deaths Reported 

• New Cases:124,717
• Total Cases: 87,549,563
• New Deaths: 399
• Total Deaths: 1,036,483

Trend of Cases and Deaths 

• 2-Wk Trend Cases:  -27.2% 
• 2-Wk Trend Deaths: +22.0% 

[Rogue1]

Yes I do.  People forget that the purpose of lockdowns was to prevent the collapse of our healthcare system.  Everywhere would have become like NYC, and quickly.  It would have decimated our health care system. 

[HiddenAngels]

Yes I think they were necessary to help slow down the spread of Covid.  
 

Not related but I learned a lot about people during the lockdown.  My mom and dad had never seen anything in their lives even similar to what we all had to go through. Everyone was stunned  and our parents/grandparents couldn’t even advise us, so I believe that experience deserves a lot of study.  It has made me more aware of a lot of things, nurse related and not nurse related regarding policy and also people’s behaviors .  I hope it has opened up other peoples eyes just the same.

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

On 6/16/2022 at 12:04 AM, NRSKarenRN said:

Ran across this article today:

When Covid Came for Provincetown

Those infected in Provincetown, Mass. last Summer, despite immunization,  practiced self isolation post finding out COVID positive upon return from vacation there--thus stopping further virus spread. 8 persons hospitalized, but no deaths.

Lock downs were part of effort to decrease virus spread and deaths at a time when there were no immunizations and effective treatment protocols.  Even then, the US has had 1 million+  COVID deaths since 3/2020.

Healthcare systems throughout  the country were stretched to their limits---over limits,  when COVID peaks hit them: insufficient staff (often out due to covid exposure/illness),  lobbys/PACU turned into nursing units.  Lack of resources: running out of IV fluids, steroids, meds, Oxygen tanks, ventilators,  morgues full so refrigerated trucks called in.   So lockdowns called for to prevent complete collapse of hospitals.

COVID Stats from the Presidents Daily Schedule 6/15/22

^This

We're seeing over 10,000 cases a day here in Florida and from what I see when people find out they have covid they self-isolate, follow the guidelines of their doctors and good practice, and do what they can to not give it to others.

This is the way to move forward along with vaccinations, not lockdowns as covid is here to stay and the variants have decided it's better to not kill the population in order to survive. 

Lockdowns were necessary at the time prevent massive infection and collapse of the healthcare system I agree.  Florida was also the poster child of when the lockdowns were lifted prematurely the healthcare system went to the brink of disaster as a huge wave of covid hit.  We handled it but at great cost.  We also have to acknowledge the great cost to the economy and mental health that lockdowns unfortunately caused.  

 

[Mursedaddy2010, BSN, RN]

Ultimately the concept of the lockdowns in this case was shortsighted and also proved to be counterproductive. COVID is 98% survivable where missed cancer dx as well as alcoholism and domestic violence are often far less survivable... but I loved how there was way less traffic. Lastly, the vaccine should now allow for no lockdowns. 

[MunoRN, RN]

5 hours ago, Mursedaddy2010 said:

Ultimately the concept of the lockdowns in this case was shortsighted and also proved to be counterproductive. COVID is 98% survivable where missed cancer dx as well as alcoholism and domestic violence are often far less survivable... but I loved how there was way less traffic. Lastly, the vaccine should now allow for no lockdowns. 

While measures to mitigate the spread of a highly transmissible virus that kills 2% of those it infects do have adverse effects, there is no rational reason to believe more people were harmed or died because of mitigating transmission.  Estimates of Covid deaths had it been allowed to freely spread are in the millions, your suggestion is simply shameful.

[Mursedaddy2010, BSN, RN]

Not ashamed...I mean... you are wrong... but that is allowed too. Again this expected response just proves how short sighted and narrow-minded fear makes us. It also demonstrates how easily we can be manipulated. We didn't mitigate any transmission... that is a laughable idea. There are better ways to handle a pandemic than turning off the world...and our minds. 

[Tenebrae, BSN, RN]

We had two main lock downs. The first one kept our death toll under 30. 

The second one also kept the death toll low. 

We saw the spread when things opened back up and we went from 20-30 dead to between 5-20 dead most days. 

The thing is while lock downs were needed IMO, they also carry a host of other side effectives both economically, both physical and mental health deteriorated. 

The thing is with a lockdown, eventually a country has to get back to being open and it sort of gives the impression of "we've given up"

[Rita June Jarvis Isaac]

I am saying it was needed, as I look at the reduced number of death that occurred in China ( hoping it is accurate) as they enforced massive lockdowns. The number of deaths in other countries that delayed lockdowns or had less drastic measures was much higher. It seems that lockdowns were valuable in saving lives, and preventing the healthcare systems from being overwhelmed, but it was a matter of life over earnings. 

[Rita June Jarvis Isaac]

On 6/24/2022 at 9:20 PM, Tenebrae said:

 

The thing is with a lockdown, eventually, a country has to get back to being open and it sort of gives the impression of "we've given up"

I see your point, but we have to learn to live with this, and people will eventually become immune or as we see weaker strains, we get out and regain some normality to live, but if it happens again, especially if deaths occur, we have to do whatever it takes to stay alive.