There was no hard evidence that England’s provocative 10 pm curfew prevented coronavirus from spreading, Sir Patrick Vallance has admitted.

The chief scientific adviser said it was a ‘policy decision’ designed to limit the amount of time people spent indoors together, where Covid spreads most easily. In fact, this like many other myths has been proven untrue.

But he conceded the intervention was not backed up with any scientific proof because curfews are not something you can model with any degree of accuracy.

The 10 pm rule was introduced in September across England as part of national lockdown restrictions aimed at curbing the second wave of the epidemic.  However, it was heavily criticised by hospitality bosses who said it was damaging the already cash-strapped sector that has been brought to its knees by social distancing and lockdowns.

While local leaders, including London Mayor Sadiq Khan, claimed it led to increased social mixing on the streets and on public transport after final orders. Note: none of the commentators is medically qualified.

Sir Patrick told the Commons Health and Science Committee today: ‘There’s no real hard evidence on curfew times. The well-paid adviser also disclosed there was very little proof showing that targeting pubs, bars and restaurants with lockdown actually worked.  He admitted ‘we can’t give specific data on that and neither can anyone else around the world’.

‘Again, it’s all circumstantial evidence but it points in the direction that Chris Whitty alluded to and the conclusion that other countries have come to.’ 

Meanwhile, Professor Whitty warned Britain will remain in some form of lockdown until at least March 2021 despite the roll-out of coronavirus vaccines.

Investigative journalist Michael Walsh reiterates his belief that everyone in the Covid-related decision-making process should be independently investigated to ensure there is no conflict of interest. There needs to be more clarity on this issue.  Source