The Government is making the same mistakes as it did in the first wave. Except with knowledge.

A thread.

The Government's strategy at the beginning of the pandemic was to 'cocoon' the vulnerable (e.g. those in care homes). This was a 'herd immunity' strategy. This interview is from March.

https://t.co/UHDUTzDNkz
This strategy failed. It is impossible to 'cocoon' the vulnerable, as Covid is passed from younger people to older, more vulnerable people.

We can see this playing out through heatmaps. e.g. these heatmaps from the second wave.

https://t.co/EiYNLEIhQ3
The Government then decided to change its strategy to 'preventing a second wave that overwhelms the NHS'. This was announced on 8 June in Parliament.

This is not the same as 'preventing a second wave'.

https://t.co/DPWiJbCKRm
The Academy of Medical Scientists published a report on 14 July 'Preparing for a Challenging Winter' commissioned by the Chief Scientific Adviser that set out what needed to be done in order to prevent a catastrophe over the winter period.

https://t.co/T4HGsQJ5M8
Around this time, the Great Barrington Declaration was published. This changed the rhetoric from 'herd immunity' to 'focused protection'.

This was and remains non-mainstream from a scientific point of view, but was popular amongst a group of commentators

https://t.co/X7EiNhMh1T
Cases were increasing rapidly, and SAGE (the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) called for a 'circuit breaker'.

https://t.co/M3Mh8UVdxh
At the same time, a focused protection-supporting group of scientists were invited to Downing Street to present the alternate view. Politically, this enabled this headline to be written.

https://t.co/GDxBEx6Yiu
Cases grew. Another tier system was introduced to attempt to control the virus.

https://t.co/prKsIKqNh9
In a fantastic acheivement of science, the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was approved on 3 December https://t.co/BZwQ3ykzrz.

Since then, the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Moderna vaccines have been approved.
A new variant was discovered with increased transmissibility. This caused a 'lockdown' as the NHS was now in crisis mode and there was 'a material risk of the NHS in several areas being overwhelmed'. The Government's second strategy is failing.

https://t.co/3eTVHXtbkm
However, this 'lockdown' is not stringent. Many more people are allowed to send their children to school allowing the virus to mix in children and their parents.

https://t.co/mjdbnwHqC2
The Prime Minister made a strange comment on 6 January. The word 'cocoon' was back. Remember that from March?

https://t.co/MzC6O5psQs
Matt Hancock has now given an interview setting out the Government's new, third, strategy

https://t.co/n2SKYx8WFN
The strategy is about 'manageable risk'. Risk to those that may die or live with the effects of catching Covid, or risk to the Government?
We are now back to vaccinating the vulnerable - focused protection if you will.
It appears that the Government has adopted a hybrid strategy - vaccination for the 'vulnerable', and herd immunity or focused protection for those that are not. There is no discussion of vaccinating children and the under-50s.

It is clear that many more lives will be lost.

More from Government

How does a government put a legislation on 'hold'? Is there any constitutional mechanism for the executive to 'pause' a validly passed legislation? Genuine Koshan.


So a committee of 'wise men/women' selected by the SC will stand in judgement over the law passed by


Here is the thing - a law can be stayed based on usual methods, it can be held unconstitutional based on violation of the Constitution. There is no shortcut to this based on the say so of even a large number of people, merely because they are loud.


Tomorrow can all the income tax payers also gather up at whichever maidan and ask for repealing the income tax law? It hurts us and we can protest quite loudly.

How can a law be stayed or over-turned based on the nuisance value of the protestors? It is anarchy to allow that.

You May Also Like

I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.


Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel

He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:

He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:

He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party