This afternoon I was sent an email message by a family member, to which was attached a video interview with a scientist, speaking about the current corona-virus pandemic. He introduced himself as a qualified virologist and epidemiologist, and proceeded to take apart the government’s strategy for dealing with the pandemic. I am not in a position to replicate his argument, but I was certainly interested to hear him repeat arguments I myself have made about the statistical illiteracy of both people in government and press reporters covering the story.
In his wide-ranging discussion he argued that the “lock-down” strategy adopted by the government has been misconceived, and that the “track and trace” response, particularly in that it is intended to lead to an intensified programme of testing, is ineffective and also in some respects counterproductive. In any case, it is his belief that by now a very significant proportion of the population have probably acquired a degree of immunity to the virus. The government has been led astray partly by the fact that the senior scientists on the advisory panel do not include people with appropriate experience and qualification.
Now: I am in no position to evaluate his argument, and I find myself in a position analogous to that I encountered back in the mid-seventies. A colleague at the University who was a biologist was severely critical of the currently dominant theories of the causation of cancer. His idiosyncratic position resulted in his ostracism within his profession. Of course, I had then as now no basis upon which to take sides in the argument. It did bring home to me then the problems experienced by anybody who stands out against conventional orthodoxy in science. It also reminded me this afternoon of the serious difficulty experienced by people like me who, although educated and intelligent, have the greatest difficulty in knowing what to do when faced with contradictory arguments put forward by people in other disciplines, each of which has radically different consequences for the way in which we are advised to conduct our lives.
If somebody tells me that a currently fashionable work of art is truly important, but I think that it is inferior, I can argue my corner. In such a case, however, I run no risk of a heavy fine should I put my head above the parapet.