A Question for Chris Whitty
A question for Chris Whitty: Given that the WHO, the Department of Health and you – as recently as March 2020 – rejected the suppression strategy, why did you describe focused protection as “wrong scientifically”?
A question for Chris Whitty: Given that the WHO, the Department of Health and you – as recently as March 2020 – rejected the suppression strategy, why did you describe focused protection as “wrong scientifically”?
A recent study determined that only 25 people aged under 18 died of COVID-19 in England up to February of this year. 76% had a serious underlying health condition. The survival rate in this age-group was 99.995%.
In June 2020 Steve Sieff created GreenBandRedBand.com as an alternative to lockdowns. A year on, some are finally trying it out, but Steve says it's time has passed: now it's time for freedom not fear.
Evidence suggests that care homes achieved a degree of focussed protection in the second wave. Perhaps if more attention had been paid to shielding in the first wave, Britain's overall death toll would be lower.
Lockdown Sceptics has published a new piece by Dr Noah Carl arguing that the strategy recommended in the Great Barrington Declaration – Focused Protection – would have resulted in fewer deaths than locking everybody down.
Public Health Scotland finds up to two thirds of serious Covid infections are caught in hospital and people shielding are 7.6 times more likely to wind up in ICU or die. Is this why lockdowns don't work?
