People have relaxed after the WHO declared the pandemic was over. They added the caveat that didn't mean the disease had disappeared but people got the wrong message.

Whilst I have had a persistent dry cough for 3 weeks it's not Covid. I try hard to turn away from others if I must cough in public to avoid the kind of nasty experience you had.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Tbh a dry cough for 3 weeks needs a doctors appointment. Not good we are told by professionals.

Tbh I think concern wouldn’t be just from me. We all know your medical issues from the past. I think you should get checked out asap. I hope it is only an allergy btw.

It was to be hoped that after "Dr" Campbell was outed as a purveyor of conspiracy theories and misinformation designed to confirm the biases of a particular audience, and enrich himself in the process, that you would stop using him as a source of "information". No such luck. You just cannot help yourself and plough blindly on once your mind is set.

I haven't watched the video or dissected the "report" it's based on. I will let those with more expertise than me do it, and then report their analysis. I have too much else to do right now.

In the meantime, as always, check the source. This "report" is from the "Institute of Economic Affairs". Sounds very official, doesn't it? This where Wiki describes them:-

[Link]

They aren't official at all. They are a right-wing pressure group who have previously published climate change denial material, received money from the tobacco industry and advocate for the abolition of the NHS.

Does that not all raise questions about why they would conclude that lockdowns didn't work? Seems more likely they already had the answer and have just be looking for ways to support it.

We'll see when it is taken apart and reviewed.

In the meantime I wouldn't give any weight at all to what "Dr" Campbell has to say about it. I bet he doesn't provide any caveats about the "IEAs" political motivations.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

I know how long it's existed and how influential it is in right-wing circles. Andrew Marr acknowledging that helps us to understand the way the right is operating these days.

Belittling the analysis in Wiki does nothing to undermine it. This is not a "think tank". It is a pressure group. Extracting the quote from Marr needs to be set against all the other things it has done and is doing before evaluating its reliability. So the whole of the Wiki analysis needs to be read.

I haven't read the "report" and won't now. I have another busy day ahead. Interestingly I could not now watch the Campbell video as it has been taken down. I wonder why? Perhaps you can explain?

I will though say this. Any report, let alone one produced by a right-wing pressure group with the reputation of the IEA, that claims that "Lockdowns have been proven a disaster" starts off from completely the wrong position.

Covid was the big disaster. Whatever we did was going to have disastrous consequences. We always knew that. The real question was which was the least worse. Expert opinion decided that locking down represented a better set of outcomes than not locking down.

Looking back now and suggesting that Lockdowns were disastrous only confirms what was predicted. What we don't know is what would have happened if we didn't lockdown. Because we didn't.

So this report looks like some juicy red meat being tossed into the mouths of the prejudiced. Maybe I am wrong and it makes those points. Maybe Campbell pointed it out. We cannot know that as his video has disappeared.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Yes really.

That piece adds nothing to what isn't already known. No piece of this kind can because there is no actual statistics to make comparisons with. It's easy to demonstrate the probable cost of lockdowns but impossible to do anything other than speculate about the cost of not locking down.

As the piece admits the IEA report has its critics. You bet it does! It's pure politics.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.