-Removed-Makes you wonder what proportion of the population are the major spreaders of viral illness i.e. people in jobs that interact with a lot of others (retail, public transport, health care) and of course children and young people.
If you work back from the numbers dead to try and estimate the numbers who had the virus in their system at that time it makes you wonder what proportion of the likely spreaders of a second wave have in fact already had the virus. If the proportion is high it starts to be hard to imagine how the virus would get around the population fast enough to cause a second rapid surge in admission rates. Maybe that is wishful thinking of course.
One of my daughters works as a cleaner in a bar/restaurant. My guess would be that job in combination with living in an area where some of the first hospitalised cases were recorded tells the story of why my family got COVID so early on, but we don't appear on any statistics anywhere. We just followed the general advice not to trouble services unless you really need to. Last time I mentioned that on here others immediately told similar stories. You start to wonder if this virus has in fact visited a large proportion of the people in the U.K. who would spread a second wave and whether that offers some protection against an unmanageable surge.
-Removed-I suppose I'm softening it with many words and clauses because I am a long way from it being a confident or certain opinion, but I do wonder if we are underestimating how many of the possible spreaders of the second wave (in the U.K.) have already had the virus in their system. It seems like it should be a high proportion to me. Perhaps we only need that particular group to have a high level of immunity to have a significantly better winter than anticipated.
2 edits
-Removed-Despite your extreme dishonesty, my posts don't allege any "conspiracy" which is defined as "A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful". https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/conspiracy
What the UK government is doing isn't a "secret plan", so it can't be a "conspiracy". I could speculate as to why they are doing it, but I chose not to. That you have gullibly accepted this data manipulation as a reason to come to certain policy conclusions doesn't necessarily mean that the intent of the manipulation was to get gullible and/or dishonest people like yourself to do so.
3 edits
-Removed-You know this is a lie.
Why keep repeating it?
The UK Government's website clearly states that the death count being given is only "Deaths within 28 days of positive test". https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ even though it admits that people die of COVID after that. It even admits that excess deaths is an "excellent method" for figuring deaths from an epidemic and those figures are far above the official UK count.
So your repeating a lie doesn't transform it into the truth no matter how many times you do so.