Two main strands today. Following the tragic murder of Sarah Everard, apparently by a serving police officer, a vigil on Clapham Common turned nasty when police intervened to break it up. Watching the footage I have a few questions. On the one hand did the police need to be so heavy-handed? Was there any reason in coronavirus lockdown law necessitating such action? On the other how many of those attending were in breach of lockdown travel restrictions, which are still in force? And (more a statement than a question) why were those attending not socially distancing? Also one clip certainly seemed to show a deliberate attempt to provoke the police. If that was so then it is a shame that innocent and reasonable demonstrations can be subverted by those whose sole intent is to cause mischief. But it proves a point I have been trying to make for a while; this sort of thing shows that what has been called a lockdown is nothing of the sort. Put any group in close proximity and they are at risk. Intern everyone in their homes, but allow people to go out to work, shop or whatever and then bring it back to a closed environment, and you have a recipe for spread – and it’s not a lockdown. Apart from which the people at the vigil were all shouting, many of them maskless. Whether therefore any of them will spread or catch the coronavirus remains to be seen, though I would not be surprised. The police are in a bind; if they do nothing they will be accused of letting people break the law (however worthy the cause) and if they do something they are pilloried for going over the top.
Also today the government is facing criticism for not locking down soon enough. But as I have tried patiently to explain more than once, a lockdown can never be a lockdown; while the imposition of what was called a lockdown, but wasn’t, might have lessened the wave a bit it would never have suppressed it altogether. And yet again the crowds gathering at last year’s Cheltenham races are being blamed for the first wave. But the evidence suggests that had nothing to do with it, as cases came in all over the country from all over Europe. If you plot backwards I doubt many secondary cases arose in Cheltenham. Nor from the football match in Liverpool, which seems to have avoided criticism this time, perhaps as – it’s Cheltenham time again.
On the science (or lack of it) front several countries have halted the use of the AstraZeneca vaccine because of a handful of reports of clotting problems. 40 possible cases out of 5 million doses? Hardly an issue, especially as it appears that the numbers of similar clotting problems recorded among non-vaccinated folk, as well a s those who received the Pfizer vaccine, were pretty well identical. Nothing to see here!? Of course it is rather amusing from one standpoint to ponder the oxymoronic behaviour of some member states of the EU; first they whine that the UK is not exporting the AstraZeneca vaccine to them (which wasn’t true anyway) and then they whine that it may be causing horrid side-effects (which it isn’t) so they don’t want it anyway. Perhaps they need some scientists to co-ordinate their response by reviewing the evidence before jumping in with a knee-jerk reaction. We don’t cancel all the trains because of forty leaves on the line. A sense of proportion, and understanding of relative risk, is sorely needed among politicians.
The Wry Observer 