Quote Originally Posted by Fellbeast View Post
you’ve argued against masks, you’ve argued against not shutting down businesses (where there is a high risk of infection) and have pretty much taken a contrarian view (contrarian to science and the views of most of the world’s scientists, not just our own) all the way through
Whose science? Scientists don't agree with each other or even with themselves at different times.

Our own scientists argued against masks to begin with. Not only that they wouldn't do much good but that they could actually be harmful. A few months later they became essential. If they are why weren't they essential at the start? It's not as if some people in the far east haven't been wearing masks for years.

As late in the day as 13th March Vallance was arguing for herd immunity. He said that we shouldn't be suppressing the virus because it might crop up again at the wrong time like winter when the NHS was overstretched. So was he right then or is he right now?

I don't think there is the same case for lockdown now as there was in the spring especially when our science and medical advisors have to produce a dodgy dossier to justify it. Not only the scenario that put deaths already at being nearly 1,000 for England on 1st November but also all the four "scenarios" going forward. As I said the other day, given the case numbers were already known it would have been relatively straight forward to make a reasonable estimate for deaths in November. They were already baked in. Lets see how the scenarios compare with the actual figures at the end of the month.