Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Lancet Psychiatry ; 8(8): 708-716, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2184825


The Blitz narrative of resilience stands in contrast to the mental health risks identified as consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although evidence from then-classified studies of World War 2 showed that most people managed the stress of bombing, those vulnerable and exposed to substantial trauma had lasting or severe mental illness. Studies of different towns and occupational groups identified the proportion of people killed and wounded, the percentage of housing destroyed, and the loss of paid employment as risk factors for psychological breakdown. Mothers and children suffered not only with evacuation, but also from the trauma of bombing and damage to schools. A general association between civilian physical and psychological casualties suggests that population groups with high rates of infection and mortality might be susceptible to mental illness as a result of the pandemic. Lockdown and distancing measures contrast with the wartime sense of belonging and shared identity, reinforced by community networks and social activities.

Bombs , COVID-19/psychology , Mental Health , World War II , Adult , Anxiety/psychology , Child , Employment/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Military Personnel/psychology , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Isolation/psychology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , United Kingdom
Cataloging & Classification Quarterly ; : 1-2, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1684269
Cataloging & Classification Quarterly ; : 1-8, 2021.
Article in English | Taylor & Francis | ID: covidwho-1085395
Lancet Psychiatry ; 7(11): 991-996, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-731956


The COVID-19 pandemic and the World War 2 aerial bombing campaign against the UK between 1939 and 1945 both exposed the civilian population to a sustained threat. Risk, whether from exposure to viral load or the density of the bombing, led to a range of protective measures and behavioural regulations being implemented. The V1 and V2 missiles used in summer and autumn, 1944, functioned as a second wave of bombing, arriving after people believed the danger had passed. Adherence to lockdown and a reluctance to return to work after the lifting of lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK were mirrored in the preference for using home-based bomb shelters during the air raids. Heightened sensitivity to risk, or a so-called deep shelter mentality, did not materialise even during the second wave of bomb attacks and some deep bomb shelters were closed because of low occupancy. The most popular protective measures were those that reflected people's preferences, and not necessarily those that provided the greatest safety. As with the COVID-19 pandemic, the public drove government policy as much as they followed it.

Civil Defense , Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Psychology, Social , Public Health , World War II , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Civil Defense/ethics , Civil Defense/history , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , History, 20th Century , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Public Health/ethics , Public Health/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Responsibility , United Kingdom