Hmm
Not sure I agree with him (a sociologist from a third tier university):
- As of today, numbers infected and dying would have to fall by 90% to get back to the levels of last September
- Experience has shown us twice that as soon as we give people greater opportunity to mix, those numbers shoot up again
- If anything, the Government is being too optimistic in projecting a free-for-all at the end of June, by which time most people will not have had their second dose (and that projection is tantamount to telling them that they need not bother.
In emphasising date rather than data-based thresholds, the Government has done the very thing it said it was going to avoid and has encouraged many, one suspects, to feel that they can relax because it's as good as over. It isn't.
Completely agree. This government is either collectively as thick as mince or thinks that we are.
"We are going to be driven by data not dates"
"Schedule of coming out of lockdown is Date1 Date2 Date 3 Date4"
Do they really not understand that these two statements are completely contradictory? Or do they really think we won't notice?
I'm perfectly happy to stick with my data-based approach:
IF
(>21 days since 2nd Vacc)
AND
(Local cases < 50/100,000)
THEN
GoTo Pub
ELSE
WaitaBitLonger
ENDIF
