An agenda to assess the “failed experiment” of lockdown
From facile statements to the reality of systematic research
First of all, let’s be clear on one point: Mr Drakeford stated the “experiment” had failed.
As our readers know, there are two problems with such a statement.
First, lockdowns and restrictions, in general, were laws set in place by spavined politickers and their overnight expert advisors; they were not experiments. Had they been experiments, we would have had protocols and assessments done. Instead, we have distortions, more propaganda, excuses and those responsible either doing bunks or wearing their feet out flip-flopping.
Second, to say an experiment has failed, you need to test it and then draw conclusions based on the evidence.
On March 6th, we asked for your views on the provisional list of elements of the “experiment” and received 76 replies.
Each element of the “experiment” or its development should be tested to draw conclusions about all or parts of the restrictions—this is how science should work.
If we wait for knights and dames to go about testing the hypotheses, we’d be as worn as the Number 10 karaoke machine. So, with your help, we have developed the points in the original post and your contributions.