Until the general public understand that the prevalence of the virus in healthy people is utterly irrelevant, we have no hope of fighting the fear-porn charts. To my mind, the only thing that matters is how many people have died, and what risk profiles those people had.

I see where you're coming from, but that approach will inevitably be interpreted as, "So it's ok if people in their 80s die, is it?".

Until the general public understand that the prevalence of the virus in healthy people is utterly irrelevant, we have no hope of fighting the fear-porn charts. To my mind, the only thing that matters is how many people have died, and what risk profiles those people had.

I see where you're coming from, but that approach will inevitably be interpreted as, "So it's ok if people in their 80s die, is it?".

ONS statistics show average age at death is 82.5 for males and 85.9 for females. Data from 2018. That fact may help.
Then there are QALYs - Quality Assessed Life Years. Worth reading about for those interested but probably dismissed by the target audience.

Sorry, but if you think another lockdown would lead to victory against lockdowns, you are deluding yourself. The whole problem is that a ruinous premise has been proposed, imsufficiently opposed, insufficiently scrutinised, then practiced and widely accepted. The more it gets practiced, the more it will be normalised.

Lockdown should not be in the Government's toolbox at all. It is tyrannical, deleterious stuff.

It has been accepted because the Government is perceived as having a reason to do it. But every tyrannical power in history has had a reason. There is always a reason. Do you think Stalin didn't have reasons? We are falling too much into the trap of arguing about evidemce for the reason. The fundamental problem isn't it the reason, or the evidence for it. The fundamental problem is that lockdown is not an instrument of government of free people; it is an instrument of tyranny and suppression.

It must be reviewed and found unlawful by a court, or it must be actively rejected by the people themselves preferably via Parliament.

Until the general public understand that the prevalence of the virus in healthy people is utterly irrelevant, we have no hope of fighting the fear-porn charts. To my mind, the only thing that matters is how many people have died, and what risk profiles those people had.

I see where you're coming from, but that approach will inevitably be interpreted as, "So it's ok if people in their 80s die, is it?".

The counter argument to that is - People in their 80's have always been dying of human corana-viruse infections. So why do we need to put the country on lock down for what is nothing more than a minor new variety of a common disease that has always has been killing old people.

Are we going to lockdown the country every flu season? Because influenza also kills very large numbers of old people. Many thousands every year.

Not sure of the most recent stats but most years pneumonia is the cause of death for around 10% of people over the age of 75. And depending on local conditions up to 10% (and often higher) of these pneumonia deaths have a human corona-virus as the primary or secondary cause of death.

Large numbers of of old people have always died every year form from human corona-virus pneumonia. At pretty much the same rate as from SARs CoV 2. So why the hysteria.

ONS statistics show average age at death is 82.5 for males and 85.9 for females. Data from 2018. That fact may help.
Then there are QALYs - Quality Assessed Life Years. Worth reading about for those interested but probably dismissed by the target audience.

The attitude we are up against is "if it saves one life, it's worth it".

There's no point in using logic or reason or being rational, because the people with that attitude didn't get it through logic, reason or being rational.

Try asking them, people die in road accidents, so if we banned driving, that would "save one life", would if be "worth it"? You won't get a sensible answer and they won't change their view on covid.

Sadly, I don't think opinions will change until enough people have seen a loved one suffer or die because they didn't get treatment they should, or known some who commits suicide due to lockdown-related depression, or sees their job disappear or their business go bust.

This is going to get a whole lot worse in all sorts of ways before sanity returns.

I think our only hope is to support the Liverpool rebels as much as we can - but even there, we're up against it. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the line about "Liverpool's ICU beds are already 90% full".

Full of WHAT, I can't tell you, and I don't know why the NHS in Liverpool wasn't spending the summer getting ready for the anticipated "second wave" either.