Currently, both 'sides' attempt to delegitimise the other's viewpoints by describing them in the extreme;

'Lockdowns until vaccine' vs. 'let it rip'

I won't get into those issues, but wanted to show that this has never been clear cut.

How has SAGE guidance evolved over time?

March 4: “School closures will be highly disruptive and likely to present an unequal burden to different sections of society... [SAGE] have divergent opinions on the impact of not applying widescale social isolation at the same time as recommending isolation to at-risk groups...

.. One view is that explaining that members of the community are building some immunity will make this acceptable. Another view is that recommending isolation to only one section of society risks causing discontent."

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/873726/04-spi-b-insights-on-combined-behavioural-and-social-interventions.pdf?fbclid=IwAR37cae5WsDVKw7EYuur-RRBUNhdsXNY2iS1XTb8LzsTNzVizP0vivwHras

Then March 9: “Advise that a combination of individual home isolation of symptomatic cases, household isolation & social distancing of >70s could.. delay onset of the peak; reduce the number of cases during the peak; and reduce the total number of cases..

(Appears very similar to the Great Barrington Declaration?: https://gbdeclaration.org/ )

.. combining stringent social distancing measures, school closures and quarantining cases, as a long-term policy, may have a similar impact to that seen in Hong Kong or Singapore, but this could result in a large second epidemic wave once the measures were lifted...

..These interventions assume compliance levels of 50% or more.. This may be unachievable in the UK population and uptake of these measures is likely to vary across groups, possibly leading to variation in outbreak intensities across different communities"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/874290/05-potential-impact-of-behavioural-social-interventions-on-an-epidemic-of-covid-19-in-uk-1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0XTc_Wsi9LKDYbrnSIVMRI6njebPowk45sa6G_M-mI2EENb8paxbRRerQ

Then, March 16: “.. a combination of case isolation, household isolation and social distancing of vulnerable groups is very unlikely to prevent critical care facilities being overwhelmed… it is unclear whether or not the addition of general social distancing measures would...

.. curtail the epidemic... It was agreed that a policy of alternating between periods of more and less strict social distancing measures could plausibly be effective at keeping the number of critical care cases within capacity. These would need to be in place for at least most...

.. of a year. Under such as policy, at least half of the year would be spent under the stricter social distancing measures. The triggers for measures to be enacted and lifted could be set at a level of UK nations and regions. There would be a 2-3 week delay between measures...

.. being put into place and their impact being felt in ICU."

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/873729/06-spi-m-o-consensus-view-on-behavioural-and-social-interventions.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0oN9OA16HHQMO5-P_QJoKfi_C6RtaHzN8gwZMvdcmG9fqBntMhhoVFYxw

This is just a snapshot, and you can read other SAGE reports and minutes here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/scientific-evidence-supporting-the-government-response-to-coronavirus-covid-19

But it seems worth remembering that this has always been a *discussion* - evidence was never clear cut, and policies evolved as they did.

So now, surely it's worth taking into account these various SAGE recommendations from before lockdown and asking; what is sensible now?

Ps. interesting from March 23 minutes

"Estimated COVID-19 fatalities are anticipated to overlap with those within the final year of their lives. It is important to get an accurate excess deaths estimate, including potential deaths due to.. measures taken"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/888787/S0386_Eighteenth_SAGE_meeting_on_Covid-19_.pdf

and:

"Given the clear links between poverty and long-term ill health, health impacts associated with the economic consequences of interventions also need to be investigated"

I would suggest that on this, Government have been negligent.

Why redact attendees?