The science surrounding Covid-19 & Sars-CoV-2 is all over the place. There is no consensus. The more we learn, the more confused we become.
Is the virus seasonal? Do lockdowns work? Are face coverings effective? Are PCR tests reliable?
I have informed opinions on the science...
But that's all they are. Opinions. And I accept that they might be wrong.
However, even if I am wrong about all of it - let's say the measures are working in preventing the virus from getting out of control & killing millions of people around the world...
We are still left with a huge moral issue.
There is no doubt that the 'new normal' is killing people.
There is no doubt that it is ruining people's access to work & love & happiness.
Many of the responses to this are fascinatingly revealing about how ignorant many people are as to how incredibly tiny the 'risk' in question actually is.
But also, just what an awful view of life so many people have.
As always, very encouraged that they are the minority.
Many people are still totally devoted to the idea that 'the science' proves that masks are effective. They relentlessly share reports, research, data & pictures of people urinating on one another to prove their point. Let's pretend they're right.
Let's imagine that it's true. Masks help to prevent the spread of respiratory viruses and help to save lives. The 40 years of research prior to 2020 was entirely inaccurate and once this 'pandemic' started, scientists decided to do SERIOUS research on the subject.
Given the nature of this virus, the number of people it has supposedly killed and the average age of those who have died, then putting that in the context of other respiratory viruses & past death tolls, how can there possibly ever be a time when masks are not necessary?
Flu is a serious illness. It kills people. Unlike Covid, it often kills healthy people and even kills children. Flu seasons overwhelm the NHS and can see up to 60,000 excess deaths.
Saying Covid is "just flu" makes it sound trivial. No disease is trivial.
But neither is love and neither is freedom.
To anyone who disagrees: Think how you are acting right now; unwilling even to shake someone's hand, see your family or visit your friends, in case you or they are shedding a virus asymptomatically.
And now recall a time when you actually felt ill, had flu symptoms, and still went to work, or to a party, or a wedding. How has your attitude changed so much? Or is it possible that this isn't you. This isn't what you think.
The choice we have been presented with from the beginning is a false one. The government says - and most people seem to believe - that we must choose between sacrificing freedoms and livelihoods or letting thousands of people die.
This is not, and has never been, the choice.
The reality has always been that a lot of people were going to die this year (though possibly no more than any other year). The choice we had to make was between two groups of people; if we let one live, the other would possibly die.
The first group of people is, almost exclusively, very old people who are already very sick, with an average age which exceeds the average life expectancy. The size of this group is around 20,000 - that is the number we hope to save, although in this context, 'save' really means
This week, we have been forced to take our daughter out of school. She is disabled and needs constant one to one supervision. The lady who usually works with her is on leave and we discovered that her replacement has been wearing a mask. All day.
We politely explained that we were not happy with this. That we thought it was inappropriate, unnecessary and psychologically abusive. In any case, the government guidelines actually stipulate that masks should not be worn when teaching children with special needs.
The school's response was to explain that they had a duty of care to their staff and that they were not prepared to find a different person to work with our daughter, nor would they ask that the current person remove her mask.