Thread by @contrarhetorics

They're shameless so they'll likely try to claim this shows the "Rule of Six" works. A quick refresher, then, that it was announced on Sept 9 & imposed on September 14. The case rate of the elderly actually remains flat up to the survey of Sept 9. 1/9

https://twitter.com/Dr_Tad/status/1317195204269502465

The next survey - on Sept 21 - finds that the daily positive results actually *grew* since the implementation of the Rule, only dipping down for the first time in the week prior to October 8. Let's now compare to the total case picture. 2/9

From Sept 11-13, the case rate actually declines. Then a sharp secular ascent *locks in* from the day of the 14th. Almost as if there were some kind of upfront intensifying effect that occurs when you corral people through association restrictions.🤔3/9 coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases

Could it be that clustering people together like this might, if megaphoned say to some sort of massive whole of society lockingdownish action, force everyone who's sick at the moment you lock down to be trapped inside with their relations and create a case spike of some sort? 4/9

Could the spike of deaths in the 1st wave have had anything to do with care homes doing this, becoming like purpose-built incubation chambers when you also dispatched the "mild" C19 sufferers in this bracket back from hospital to those homes *in line with the lockdown rules*? 5/9

Could the rules that were so concerned about the risks of "community spread" overrunning the hospitals have created some sort of *incentive* to do something as utterly mad as sending elderly C19 cases back a place where their transmission could endanger the most lives? 6/9

I mean, it was crucial as many beds were left empty as possible, wasn't it? A tsunami of mortal sickness was immanent! "Look at the "runaway" case numbers!" Unless... 7/9

Could the shadow of an NHS meltdown been a *result* of the rules treating "community spread" as an indiscriminate, equal opportunity threat across society, since it was actually lockdown itself that accelerated cases & deaths *first* before slowing (not halting) both *after*? 8/9

Of course not. How dare you in Thunbergian. To the "short, sharp circuit-breaker", comrades! 9/9