In Africa and India, where Lockdowns are ineffective or non-existent, there's been a "huge but surprisingly mild epidemic of Covid". A reasonable hypothesis is that Lockdowns cause mutations to more severe forms by hindering the natural evolution to milder forms. We don't know.
Is not the scientific approach to avoid the risk of a catastrophic storm of deadly mutations until we do know?
We seem to be engaging in an insane experiment in self-harm while groping around in the dark and punching ourselves in the face.
For a country where the government is supposedly "following the science", whatever that means, the UK seems to be progressing along a thoroughly unscientific route.
As you say, blundering about from pillar to post, seemingly without taking any notice of the results of each separate experiment, instead happy to just continue because "it should work, therefore it must work". All the time hemorrhaging tax payers' money in enormous amounts.
Leaving a trail of mass destruction in its wake, which is apparently justified because "we had to do it to save lives", and "keep people safe".
But how many lives have been saved? No one knows, because the only indicator is taken from hugely inflated numbers derived from a proven to be flawed Imperial model.
But with one of the highest death counts in the world, one might be excused for thinking none of it has been very effective.
In Africa and India, where Lockdowns are ineffective or non-existent, there's been a "huge but surprisingly mild epidemic of Covid". A reasonable hypothesis is that Lockdowns cause mutations to more severe forms by hindering the natural evolution to milder forms.
I think you considerably underestimate the actions African countries have taken to inhibit covid (eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-54418613 ).
Counter to your argument that lockdown prevents evolution to milder forms, the exact opposite theory suggests that the dangerous variants (UK, South Africa, Brazil) have evolved precisely in those regions which have made a bad job of limiting growth.
It's too early to make any of these conclusions.
In Africa and India, where Lockdowns are ineffective or non-existent, there's been a "huge but surprisingly mild epidemic of Covid". A reasonable hypothesis is that Lockdowns cause mutations to more severe forms by hindering the natural evolution to milder forms. We don't know.
One major factor is age. SARs2 targets age more than anything else Africa has a very young population. India average age 26, Africa 20. UK 40 for example.
But yes, lockdowns are naturally selecting for forms that are more infectious. Thats how it works.
Is not the scientific approach to avoid the risk of a catastrophic storm of deadly mutations until we do know?
Well the more a virus replicates the more chance there is of a more nasty mutation breaking out.
On the other hand, our tactic of partial vaccination followed by a huge time lag is the perfect way to encourage and select for resistant mutatons.
A reasonable hypothesis is that Lockdowns cause mutations to more severe forms by hindering the natural evolution to milder forms.
No, that is not a reasonable hypothesis, as it stands since dead hosts do not transmit the disease, only living ones, which milder forms encourage. Lockdowns may slow the evolution whatever the direction, but would not tip the evolution either way. The direction of the evolution is biased towards variants that spare the host, and against variants which kill the host. Splatt would argue that lockdowns bias the evolution towards more transmissible variants, but that is an independent property.
