Leading UK Epidemiologist admits UK lockdown was a ‘monumental mistake’ and must not happen again.
(emphasis mine)
Dr. Woolhouse is not only a well respected epidemiologist and professor of epidemiology, but he is actually on the scientific panel that advises the UK Government. He is privy to the inside conversations and processes that led to the advice to lock down, and initially supported this move. So to see him admit straight up that the reason for the lockdown was, literally, a combination of panic and not knowing what else to do, is simply astounding if you stop and think about it.
He says further:
So they panicked, advised lockdown only because they literally didn't know what else to do, and did not consider the unintended consequences of this tactic that was at best a delay measure and not a solution. A leading expert in the relevant field straight up admits what some of us have been saying since March and April! There isn't some secret hidden knowledge that only the high priests have access to. They shat the bed, and have been scrambling to cover for that via obfuscation, doubling down on stupid, and insulting and blaming the populace for not adhering to measures that were never a viable solution in the first place.
And now that we are 5+ months in, a few of them are finally realizing that the severity of those second and third order effects are rapidly becoming more damaging when viewed holistically, than covid itself. The cure is worse than the disease. As many of us have been saying since the Springtime.
Like many others here, I have been consistently insulted and called names and have had my integrity and intelligence questioned for saying this back in March and April, and not backing down since. No one has apologized yet.
One of the most interesting things about this, to me, is the common thread that the people who were able to see this for what it was earliest are people who are familiar not with virology and epidemiology and immunology and public health. Not at all. It was people who are familiar with the underlying case for free market economics, specifically Frederic Bastiat's "Seen and Unseen," Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" that expounds on Bastiat, Hayek's fatal conceit and spontaneous order concepts, and maybe Leonard Reed's "I, Pencil" understanding of the inherent interconnectedness of the economy and why you can't successfully label, by fiat, who is essential.
You could've made a principled "rights based" case against lockdowns the whole time that I would have agreed with. But understanding early on - once it was clear that this was not a Frankenstein virus with the simultaneous deadliness of ebola with the spreading capacity of the common cold or flu - that rights aside, the consequences of lockdown would be worse than the disease it was intended to cure - was something I only saw from people familiar with these concepts.