Here's the thing mack, there are some topics where I don't give a single flying fig what someone's
opinion is.
If someone said, 'I'm of the opinion that the moon is made of cheese, prove me wrong, have you ever been to the moon? The moon landings were faked by the way, just my opinion' - then I don't really care to hear any more of that person's 'opinions'.
Having an opinion about most stuff is fine, there's a lot in this world is partly, mostly, or entirely subjective, but when we get to observable facts that can be proven with evidence and data, then it stops being a matter of opinion, and potentially becomes a monument to ignorance and stupidity.
Now let me be clear,
I am not calling anyone here stupid or ignorant, however I honestly think that when it comes to some aspects of the debate around Covid-19, we're getting perilously close to some folks denying objective reality, an objective reality that has the substantial weight of science behind it.
Single example, this whole position of 'Just let the people who want to get on with life do so, the rest can shield or stay locked down' - that has now been shown to be an utter (and lethal) fallacy on so many levels, and a course of action that would genuinely and literally cause the NHS to stop functioning before the end of the year, that I am nearing the limit of my ability to remain on the correct side of patient civility with it. (And the endless false equivalence with 'Why can't we do what Sweden did' or just flat out failing to understand what Sweden has actually done.)
See also, herd immunity.
There are many, many things to get annoyed about when it comes to Covid-19, but some people are astonishingly adept at identifying all the wrong targets.
So if anyone has a fact-based, evidence-led rebuttal to the points made by the infectious disease doctor listed above, I'm more than happy to hear them. But 'in my opinion he's wrong' doesn't count.
View attachment 144197