Absolutely agree with you speedstick. Lockdowns in my opinion do not work and the economic damage and human misery it has caused far outweighs any lockdown ( again in my opinion)..
😀

The fine city of Leicester is surely a prime example that contrary to the title of this post, that lockdown certainly DOES NOT WORK.

I'm sorry to hear this. The evidence that lockdown worked to delay infections on a national scale is very solid, but that says little about the local scale, and collateral damage, it's true.

Likewise in Australia and New Zealand whilst these countries have agreed limited spread of infection case numbers via lockdowns, these countries are effectively now isolated from the rest of the world, however can this be described as having worked,

Yes, I will only say a harsh national-scale lockdown worked to inhibit spread temporarily. That all I can say.
GBD is the only effective balanced way to manage Covid

basically, correct. it's not worth locking down, I guess.

Absolutely agree with you speedstick. Lockdowns in my opinion do not work and the economic damage and human misery it has caused far outweighs any lockdown ( again in my opinion)..
😀

😀 😀 😀 you are quite right, it's true. The collateral damage is just too much.

The 'rocket launch' at the start of October was solely the result of the mass testing of asymptomatic students who had high +ve rates for a likely myriad of different reasons. if that mass testing had not happened there would have been a much steadier increase and much much less needless panic.

The same things has happened recently in London and larges areas of the East where whole populations have been tested irrespective of symptoms, the result of which has of course been helpful in the argument that the mutant strain is ‘out of control’

if you go from only testing those with symptoms to testing everyone then by definition with a virus with such high rates of asymptomatic infection you will see a sharp rise in ‘cases’. It is not at all reflective of the trajectory of infection.

In most areas that saw the spikes at the start of October, +ve tests fell very rapidly once they ran out of students. Lockdown 2.0 had nothing to do with it

The 'rocket launch' at the start of October was solely the result of the mass testing of asymptomatic students

Thanks for looking , but you are wrong. Look at this plot, it is from the ZOE symptom checker app. It only includes input from symptomatic members of the general public.There is no mass testing involved with the ZOE app.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data#levels-over-time
the spikes at the start of October, +ve tests fell very rapidly once they ran out of students. Lockdown 2.0 had nothing to do with it

I repeat, this plot only includes symptomatic results from the symptomatic ZOE app users no tests involved.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data#levels-over-time

The peak of the curve is on 4th/5th Nov. Did (a)all the students "run out" on on that exact same date or (b)did lockdown start? Answer is (b).

Occam's razor tells us to use the most economical explanation with the smallest number of assumptions , Occam would undoubtedly have plumped for lockdown as the cause. It is not economical or even possible that the all the students quit using ZOE on same day.

By the way, hover over graph at Dec 3th (day after end of lockdown)and notice curve starts to bottom out almost right after (e.g on 7th through 12th). Could that be coincidence? Not likely, but possible. I'm convinced by it. Look, it's only natural. If everybody is locked down, the virus has to slow. It is only surprising to have such an accurate correlation of it in the ZOE app. I'm afraid lockdowns do slow the spread but they kill the society.And that is the bottom line!