Well seems we are about to get another big lockdown whatever
But to that site. It's a collection of blog posts so is a difficult read but in essence it seems to make two points
a) government projections are less than accurate
b) the original lockdown justification was wrong
On (a) he seems to be pushing the less than honest inference that if something isn't 100% right it has to be totally rejected. Well that's false thinking unless you have a better projection to work with. We don't
On (b) it all boils down to this article he wrote and was published freely viewable here:
https://thecritic.co.uk/has-the-government-over-reacted-to-the-coronavirus-crisis/ And in essence that article says we should never have had the first lockdown because the maths don't support the death avoidance value analysis. Well I don't know about his £££ analysis (it looks questionable) but he's projecting a false point again. The March 23rd announced lockdown was not about money but because the NHS was already struggling and was projected to become massively overwhelmed. The maths aren't hard to do when you have over 1200 Covid admissions a day and it's doubling every week.
Had the NHS got anywhere near 10,000 admissions a day it would have failed and you would get all sorts of societal breakdown issues if that ever happens and the cost of those would outweigh that £350B mooted cost of Lockdown
Hospital admissions are already above where they were on March 23rd and while they are increasing they are nothing like the exponential rate we had in March. That makes another big lockdown debateable, I await their words.
But the death rate is now over 250 a day rising at over 55% a week. We have to do something
https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/
