Adele Winkley I think these guys were careful to qualify their statements, limiting them to their county. They explicitly said their analysis doesn't apply to NY. I think that was reasonable and responsible.

They point out inconsistencies in policy - you can go to a large store with lots of other people, but can't go for a walk to a quiet park. That makes no sense. The points they make about immunology, masks etc. are all worth discussing.

As other critics have pointed out - there isn't any science behind govt policy either, there are no studies, there is no evidence they can point to that says "this is the correct, tried and tested policy." Everyone is trying to work out the right thing to do, which is why discussion is important, otherwise bad ideas can become entrenched policy.

The policy response has come from computer modelling, which is problematic, especially with a new disease for which there is no data. Hence Imperial college revising their predictions on a near daily basis at one point. The models needs to be challenged and debated, especially in the light of real world experience, which is what these guys bring to the discussion.

Perhaps this wasn't the right way to do it. But how do the doctors on the front line make their voices heard in a top-down system like ours?


You'll only receive email when they publish something new.

More from Winston Smith
All posts