-
It's just the (assumed facetious) comparison to Brexit I was questioning. Brexit you can say whatever you want because there's no consequences. JRM orchestrated it so he could lock up young virgins and drink their blood. Couldn't do it before, human rights.
On public health a responsible person will think before they speak. But obviously it's perfectly fine to question the policy in a considered manner.
frankenbike-
I disagree that there are no consequences with Brexit. Public opinion has and will continue to be shaped by purposeful misinformation drip fed over years and months to a gullible public, for people to say that questioning government policy undermines the success of the Brexit process is disingenuous nonsense designed to silence dissent. People have been saying whatever they want with no consequences personally, but with huge consequences to our society and with explicit implications for security and disaster management as we're now seeing in real time.
For people to then turn round and say you're not allowed to criticise a pandemic response because of non-compliance is just batshit-even resource poor Haiti has a more intensive testing regime than the USA at the moment. Pointing that out doesn't mean tinkerbell will croak.
Brexit shortages combined with a mis-managed pandemic would be absolute chaos and would see us in a similar situation to Iran who are under sanctions, so I guess we're lucky it's happened this year rather than next.
deleted
absolutely, but again, none of these are shaping policy response so I'm more inclined to lay any resulting non-compliance at the door of facebook and twitter for giving a platform to them as opposed to scientific debate over quite a contentious policy that departs from International standards. It's not like all the Karens that are going to fail to comply and opt for rubbing their aged parents with jade eggs and horseradish are doing it because the head of the WHO thinks Boris is an inept wanker?