So wondering what those interviewed would therefore see as a way out of this if restrictions or vaccine are not the answer in their opinion!
Why is that so surprising? Is it because the
official scientists have been claiming that no one has natural immunity to Coronaviruses and that therefore, a vaccine is the
only route to herd immunity? There are other Scientists besides Whitty, Vallance and Fauci, and a very large number of them support the view that prior exposure to other Coronaviruses produces an immune reaction to the novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. What also indicates that there's already widespread immunity in the UK population is the fact that a graph of the "excess deaths" for the 2019/2020 'flu season shows the exact same pattern as
any seasonal 'flu. The initial exponential rise in deaths occurred, as it always does, because the virus was ripping through the vulnerable population. When most of the vulnerable people have been infected, the deaths peak and start to decline, more slowly than the initial rise, because there's still a pool of vulnerable people who get infected after the peak, but it inevitably declines back to baseline by the beginning of Summer. That graph is known as a Gompertz curve. That the graph of "excess deaths" for 2019/2020 is no different from that of any seasonal flu is a clear indication that the pandemic has been greatly overstated, and that pre-existing immunity to the virus has been greatly understated.
We are now in the situation that the restrictions are creating greater harm than the virus and should be lifted unconditionally. What risk is there to healthy people who have no symptoms at all from a virus that you have to have a test for in order to find out that you're "sick"? Absent of the test, you'd have no idea that you're "infected" and you'd just carry on with your life, go to work and you'd be perfectly safe and happy. But get tested, and you're told that you must self-isolate and therefore, if you're unable to continue working at home, you're unable to earn an income. There is currently a group of people the size of the population of Wales who are under restrictions because of either a positive test or because they were in close proximity to someone who tested positive. The vast majority of those people have no symptoms at all, and the World Health Organisation's advice is that asymptomatic people only very rarely are capable of spreading a disease. We are effectively telling 3 million healthy people that they may not earn a living based on a total myth, the myth of the asymptomatic spreader.
The logical thing to do would be to stop testing anyone who has no symptoms and concentrate on doing the tests on people who do have symptoms with greater care and accuracy. The rush to test as many people as possible has led to shoddy practices that can easily cross-contaminate samples and short cuts when it comes to carefully calibrating the testing equipment between runs. The fact that the Lateral Flow rapid testing method used in Liverpool found that vastly fewer people were "positive" than the so-called "Gold Standard" Drosden PCR method had found is a clear indication that there are serious problems with the PCR testing in the UK. We're destroying people's businesses, jobs and creating mental health issues for an entire generation of children based on nothing more than the say-so of Whitty and Vallance and the results of shoddy, flawed testing. It's more than time to reevaluate the whole approach to this novel Coronavirus in the UK.