Quite a perverse article. Because the steps we took worked, and what could've happened - as it did happen in the US, the UK and multiple other countries - didn't happen, now they say the restrictions and testing were never needed. But if you want to see how things could've been you don't need to look far - for example, the US' 7 day daily average for deaths is over 2000 and they're closing in on a million dead.
It's a line that was predicted at the start of this thing - we'll take precautions, they'll be effective and then critics will, as a result, say that they were never needed in the first place.
As an example, the reason the death rate is so low is because we didn't allow Covid to spread, not because Covid itself is harmless.
The bigger question is why these articles get published.
Edit: Oh, and BTW, given that I'm currently in isolation because one of my kids GOT COVID AT SCHOOL and it WAS PICKED UP BY RA TESTING and there were 18,000 kids with it in Victoria since school went back I'd say that the fears weren't unfounded but the testing has worked well - my daughter has few symptoms and they're largely the same as the cold I have *runny nose but 2x clear RAT) and if she'd been at school it's likely that she would've infected others but hasn't because the RAT picked it up.


Reply With Quote
) When our two were littlies we had some dreadful ailments. GPs shrugged those off as normal Kid stuff.

Bookmarks