Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Covid's Effect on Mental Health Not as Great as First Thought, Study Suggests (theguardian.com) 110

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Covid-19 may not have taken as great a toll on the mental health of most people as earlier research has indicated, a new study suggests. From a report: The pandemic resulted in "minimal" changes in mental health symptoms among the general population, according to a review of 137 studies from around the world led by researchers at McGill University in Canada, and published in the British Medical Journal. Brett Thombs, a psychiatry professor at McGill University and senior author, said some of the public narrative around the mental health impacts of Covid-19 were based on "poor-quality studies and anecdotes," which became "self-fulfilling prophecies," adding that there was a need for more "rigorous science."

However, some experts disputed this, warning such readings could obscure the impact on individual groups such as children, women and people with low incomes or pre-existing mental health problems. They also said other robust studies had reached different conclusions. Thombs said: "Mental health in Covid-19 is much more nuanced than people have made it out to be. Claims that the mental health of most people has deteriorated significantly during the pandemic have been based primarily on individual studies that are 'snapshots' of a particular situation, in a particular place, at a particular time. They typically don't involve any long-term comparison with what had existed before or came after."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Covid's Effect on Mental Health Not as Great as First Thought, Study Suggests More

Covid's Effect on Mental Health Not as Great as First Thought, Study Suggests

Comments Filter:

  • My mental health improved (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anachronous Coward ( 6177134 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @02:29PM (#63356589)

    Now that I've been WFH full time for over three years, not only my mental health but also my physical health has improved. Just got back from my daily five mile walk. Once it's warm enough I'll be cycling at least 18 miles daily.

    Rarely had time or energy for this when I was in the office four days a week. Thank you Covid!

    • Leaving only an hour a day to do work. That greatly helps with mental health as well.

      • Re:My mental health improved (Score:4, Informative)

        by omnichad ( 1198475 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @02:59PM (#63356667) Homepage

        How long do you think it takes to walk 5 miles? I think you're in worse shape than you think. A leisurely 3.5 miles per hour would only take you 1.5 hours to hit 5 miles. And most of that could just be reclaimed commuting time.

        Bicycling is much faster than walking. Easy to hit 12mph at a leisurely pace pace. Still the same 1.5 hours.

        • 3.5 mph isnt leisurely, it's quite a fast walk.

          • I'd say 5 mph is quite fast, but not a huge challenge. 3.5 is just a little bit above average pace, but I get bored with slow walking so I might be a bit skewed. If you're doing it for fitness, you're probably not going slower than that anyway.

            • I'd say 5 mph is quite fast, but not a huge challenge.

              Walking 5 miles per hour is definitely a significant challenge. It's well above normal walking speed and well into the jogging speed range.

              • So-called "power" walking is less efficient than jogging and burns more energy. But it's also lower intensity on the joints. Jogging speed and speed walking mostly overlap in the speed range.

                5mph is only provided as a contrast to an average/leisurely 3.5mph. it's not what's being suggested. I think you forgot that I was replying to someone that said 3.5mph was fast.

                • 3.5 miles per hour might not be what you consider "fast", but it definitely isn't leisurely; it's not-insignificantly above normal walking pace.

                  Though as someone else pointed out, it also depends a lot on your height. If you're around 6 feet tall (like I am), your normal walking pace may be 3.25-3.5 miles per hour, just because you cover more ground per step.

                  • You do know that the original post in this thread is about someone who is walking 5 miles a day for their physical health, right? I think we can use at least 3.5 mph as a baseline for how much of their work day it takes up. Regardless of whether 3 mph seems more reasonable to you, a 5 mile walk doesn't take significantly longer at the slower pace, which is the whole entire point.

                    You seem to think that walking as fast as jogging is a "significant challenge" which maybe you consider jogging or running to be

          • Depends how tall/fit you are? I'm 6'1"; when I'm trying to walk at top speed I go just over 4.25 MPH (and that's on a route that has a couple points where I need to wait for stoplights, adding a wait of a minute or two typically; 2.5 miles long, takes 35 minutes), and even when I'm not trying to go particularly fast, I go around 3.3-3.6 MPH (same route, 42-45 minutes. 3.5 MPH may not be "leisurely", but it's not all that fast.

        • A leisurely 3.5 miles per hour would only take you 1.5 hours to hit 5 miles.

          3 miles per hour is considered typical walking pace. 3.5 miles per hour isn't quite "power walking", but maintaining that pace for 5 miles would be a decent exertion.

          Having said that, your general point is still true. Walking 5 miles should still be under 2 hours. Cycling 20 miles should be somewhere around 2 hours (+/- probably 30 minutes), depending on terrain/hills.

          • Eh, I hike with significant hills and stop to take pictures and admire views and wildlife and am not doing it for the exercise but for enjoying the outdoors, and my phone still shows me averaging 3 MPH on 10 mile hikes. Walking on flat ground at 3 MPH for 5 miles shouldn't even make you sweat if it's not hot out.

            • Walking on flat ground at 3 MPH for 5 miles shouldn't even make you sweat if it's not hot out.

              Because like I said, 3 miles per hour is standard walking pace. 3.5 miles per hour might not sound like it's much faster, but it is.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by sjames ( 1099 )

          He must do all of his walking with his pet tortoise if he thinks 5 miles takes the whole day.

        • oh look, country bumpkin can't conceive of a five mile walk with traffic control devices and busy crossings.

          • It's like you've never heard of suburbs, parks, walking trails.... Why would you go on a walk somewhere that you can't actually maintain a decent heart rate?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by realxmp ( 518717 )

        Just got back from my daily five mile walk. Once it's warm enough I'll be cycling at least 18 miles

        Leaving only an hour a day to do work. That greatly helps with mental health as well.

        You must be a very slow cyclist. My dad cycled 13 miles a day (6.4 miles each way, ~1/2hr journey) each day for pretty much his entire teaching career. 18 miles ain't much more. 1 1/2hr ride ain't much of a dent in your day. Pretty much a standard gym workout time.

    • Re:My mental health improved (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @02:58PM (#63356665) Homepage Journal
      I've been WFH since FAR before covid hit.

      While I think it has been great for mental....my health has taken a hit, as that I spend far too much time sitting in meetings and not being active as I once was.

      I have a motorized stand up desk, but I either forget to stand, or I find that if I'm having to really concentrate...I do that better sitting than standing.

      One thing on this story I'm not getting...are they talking about the mental effects from LONG covid, say you actually had caught the disease...

      Or, is this referring to mental anguish from just being locked down for a year or so?

      If the latter, I can believe this study, I mean, while it was a PITA having to deal with it...it wasn't that big of a deal. Not like you'd get PTSD from a year or so of being forced to wear a mask, or not able to go everywhere you wanted all the time, etc.

      • I have a motorized stand up desk, but I either forget to stand,

        What I do to help with that is always enter meetings standing. If you get too tired as it goes along you can always go back to sitting.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Or, is this referring to mental anguish from just being locked down for a year or so?

        From the "fuck your feelings" crowd.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by ArchieBunker ( 132337 )

        I mean, while it was a PITA having to deal with it...it wasn't that big of a deal. Not like you'd get PTSD from a year or so of being forced to wear a mask, or not able to go everywhere you wanted all the time, etc.

        Oh you poor baby. Target asked you to wear a thin paper mask. I believe the correct term here is snowflake.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by sjames ( 1099 )

          Clearly, many of the masks have been blessed by priests and rabbis and some in our population find that it burns when they put them on...

        • Oh you poor baby. Target asked you to wear a thin paper mask. I believe the correct term here is snowflake.

          Actually after the first few months...no one wore a mask that much anyway, so it wasn't draconian down here.

          And as it turns out...MOST of those masks didn't do a damned thing to prevent getting or spreading covid, so it was kind of worthless and stupid for so many that did requirement to require them...or throw a hissy fit if they saw someone without.

    • This. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @03:16PM (#63356699)
      So much this.

      Yeah, there were some issues with people feeling isolated, but as a nerd it was pretty great. I'm obviously long since out of school, but for a lot of kids there was overall less stress doing school from home (even if there are other issues with that). South Park did a whole episode on the topic (albeit from the perspective of Eric Cartman being lazy instead of from a nerd who just wants to be left alone).

      It's not just a nerd thing though. We put a lot of excess stress on kids going to school they don't need (for a variety of bad reasons). And not getting dragged into the school building every day relieves a lot of that.

      I'm not saying we do away with school buildings, but it's worth asking ourselves why we let schools suck so damn much. Human beings aren't really meant to be in a constant state of stress like we are. And "whatever doesn't kill me" is B.S.
    • My commute to and from the office is basically a 2-mile walk in each direction. Add lunch and I get the same thing, plus human contact. Yay for human contact!

      • My commute to and from the office is basically a 2-mile walk in each direction. Add lunch and I get the same thing, plus human contact. Yay for human contact!

        I get my contact from family and my many dear "real" friends I've had for years.

        Work people are work people, not friends...that can get you in trouble.

        Do you not have friends outside of work...I mean real ones, not "Facebook like friends"....?

        • Not good at making non-work friends, TBH. I don't have close family in the US any more. I don't drink much or do sports (don't really have stamina for either).

          • Not good at making non-work friends, TBH. I don't have close family in the US any more. I don't drink much or do sports (don't really have stamina for either).

            I understand.

            But do try to get out there and meet friends outside of work....you often mention you walk a lot, so I surmise you are not a shut in. Just try to make conversation while out...shopping or whatever.

            Not sure where you live, if you were in the south, it is EASY to strike up a conversations with damned near anyone....up northeast, not as f

            • I don't want to live in the Stinking South. People are too fucking conservative there. No public transit either to speak of, and I 3 trains and don't want to have to use a stinkbox car. Plus too hot in summer, not cold enough in winter. This winter has been warm in the NE, but generally we get winter. I love winter and snow. Outside my door, not flying to Tahoe to get it. I'd sooner move somewhere in Southern Europe or Ireland.

              • I don't want to live in the Stinking South. People are too fucking conservative there. No public transit either to speak of, and I 3 trains and don't want to have to use a stinkbox car. Plus too hot in summer, not cold enough in winter. This winter has been warm in the NE, but generally we get winter. I love winter and snow. Outside my door, not flying to Tahoe to get it. I'd sooner move somewhere in Southern Europe or Ireland.

                Wow...way to be insulting.

                I wasn't suggesting you move anywhere...I didn't kno

            • The other problem is that the same tech that's enabling cower at home jobs is reducing spontaneous interaction. People would rather watch Netflix at home than go out to a bar. More delivery, less in person shopping, fewer stores. And everyone is buried in their nasty little stinkphone.

  • When a species IQ hovers near absolute zero there’s no possibility of going lower.

  • The biggest crackpots croaked, so.... it's kinda hard to say if you look at the average...

  • What I love about science (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gillbates ( 106458 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @03:33PM (#63356729) Homepage Journal

    What I love most about science is that if you're willing to spend enough money, you can completely reverse the present scientific consensus. A well-structured study can be narrowed to the extent that it says whatever the funders want said, without stating anything categorically false. This isn't just p-hacking; if you can control the funding of science to exclude those scientists who disagree with your point of view, the only credentialed scientists remaining will be those who support your views. Sometimes, a "failure to find an effect", while not deliberately lying, is all that is needed.

    • Re:What I love about science (Score:4, Funny)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @03:58PM (#63356767)

      *Citation needed.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gtall ( 79522 )

      "control the funding of science" Really? What dept is that under? One you imagined?

      • Their next reply is going to be "follow the money" without any more context.

        • Think so?

          This important tactic assumed the public would be suspicious if oil industry executives dismissed climate change, but might trust the views of seemingly independent scientists. These would be put forward to take part in debates on TV, potentially confusing a general audience who would see opposing scientists in white coats arguing about complex technical details without knowing who to believe. The problem was, sometimes these "white coats" weren't truly independent. Some climate sceptic researc

      • Perhaps you'd like a paper on one of the most egregious examples?
        :
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]

        For a more recent example, you can look into how oil companies have been manipulating funding to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change.

        And let's not forget that a large amount of funding for science is controlled by congress, who are all being bought off through PACs to oppose any scientific research that might undermine a company's profits and ability to externalize costs (and no, I'm not going

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by narcc ( 412956 )

      What morons modded this insightful? This isn't how science works. At all. Get your head out of your ass.

    • A process. A means by which to determine the truth.

      You do not speak of science. No, you speak of a false god, a straw man that exists in the minds of those who need a boogeyman, or red-herring, a nothing, with which to battle and then declare victory over. Or to be "against" because seeking confirmable, repeatable results is somehow, mysterious to those who demand a mystery. Because with clarity their purposes fall to pieces as not in the interest of but those that push them. Good day sir. You look

      • You've got a pretty good "No true Scotsman" fallacy going on there. Maybe you should continue to illustrate just how naive you really are? Or perhaps reply to the point I made about the corruption of science through evolutionary funding?

        • I'm certain that you are correct. You live in a world where science is corrupt. I do not. In my world people, mostly men, misuse tools and processes, but the tools and processes remain tools. A corrupt tool needs replacing. What better tool did you have in mind? Anyway I like my world better. "Corruption of science through evolutionary funding" doesn't mean anything to me. Hope things go well with you.

          But, perhaps, maybe by evolution you perhaps mean that the glorious Yahweh, Mighty Powers established the
    • You can't just flood the market with bad studies. Most peer review is done at universities by graduate students. If you try to do that you will very quickly be found out and the scientists who tried to do it will be discredited.

      This is not to say you can't get fake studies done by the industries that policy makers use and abuse so that they can do policies that are not actually informed by science. But let's not pretend that everyone involved doesn't know exactly what they're doing. They know they're us

      • Really? [scientificamerican.com]

        Honestly, peer review is just groupthink on steroids. Granted, it's better than nothing, but it is far from the degree of scrutiny routinely used in other fields. Alan Sokal [wikipedia.org] managed to get complete giberish past peer review into Social Text. And let's not forget this guy [wikipedia.org], who managed to discover non-existent elements 116 and 118.

        There's a saying you've got to be smarter than what you're working with. If you don't understand how science can be corrupted to produce the outcome desired, you're

        • > margarine is healthier than butter, and that vaccination would prevent the spread of covid

          What? Those statements are just vague enough to be true and false at the same time. And more generally, I think you're mixing rigorous scientific research, which is good, with the ability to manipulate media, politicians and public opinion.

        • The tobacco research you linked to has been thoroughly debunked by peer review. So has the climate change research that's using the same tactics the tobacco research did. The peer review system works you're just not using it. You don't want to use it because you have your preconceived notions and you don't want them upset. I think the Texas Republican party called them fixed beliefs when they put a line item in their party platform against critical thinking.
    • Even with contract research that isn't really how it works at all. What you're pretending happens would be more easily accomplished with being choosey with your citations for a correlational study than *waves hands* funding.
  • Mental health was already pretty bad, and many people who want help simply can't get it (https://www.thenationalcouncil.org/news/lack-of-access-root-cause-mental-health-crisis-in-america/). When there is nowhere to go but up, it is hard for anything to really make it *worse.*
    • It is interesting to read about the recent study that suggests that the impact of COVID-19 on mental health may not be as significant as originally thought. While this is certainly welcome news, it is important to note that the pandemic has still had a considerable impact on people's mental well-being. For those interested in psychology I would recommend checking here [happyessays.com] great articles, they offer a range of insightful and thought-provoking essays on the subject. The uncertainty and disruption caused by the pa

  • Mental health doesn't track physical health (Score:3)

    by rbrander ( 73222 ) on Thursday March 09, 2023 @04:29PM (#63356841) Homepage

    You'd think so, but no. I did a blog post today, about Matthew Walther, who scandalized many readers of The Atlantic in December 2021, with his article about how, where he lives in rural Michigan, "nobody cares about COVID". He described a happy place, compared to much of America, where nobody wore masks at weddings and other parties, his wife's doctors didn't discuss masks or vaccinations during her pregnancy, just an ordinary year. Much cranky letter-writing and journalism resulted. ( Blog post has links: http://brander.ca/cccc#walther [brander.ca] )

    The post goes on to note that Michigan was surrounded by states and a province that had a fraction of Michigan's death rate - if they had the death rate of Ontario, just across a river, 30,000 Michganders would still be walking around...and Ontario is NOT a rural province.

    But, perhaps Michiganders were psychologically happier, as their ignorance, created by just not-caring, was bliss.

  • Seriously, the COVID isolation only really did anything to the extroverts in the population. Most of the introverts actively enjoyed it, since no one bothered them. It just seemed bad because, surprise, surprise, the extroverts are the ones that shout and yack and talk about how horrible everything is. Causing an echo chamber to form while sane people (introverts) were off quietly enjoying not having to deal with nearly as many idiots...

  • To me, the primary reason that this might be true is that we're all so completely screwed up, anyway. These days, if you're not seeing a therapist, you're the exception.

  • https://jonathanhaidt.substack... [substack.com]

    Depression and anxiety and suicide has SKYROCKETED among young girls since 2012, vastly more than that suffered by boys.

    Curiously, if you allow the respondents to self-identify as liberal or conservative, there's a distinction there too that liberal girls are the worst hit by a large margin, followed by liberal boys, conservative girls, and conservative boys (con girls only just passed con boys around 2016, otherwise they actually track fairly closely).

Slashdot Top Deals

Put your Nose to the Grindstone! -- Amalgamated Plastic Surgeons and Toolmakers, Ltd.

Close