For more and more people, the logic and apparent science being used to justify extreme lockdown and social distancing measures is making less and less sense.

For weeks, the public was told the aim was to ‘flatten the curve’ to avoid critical care facilities in hospitals from being overrun. In most countries now, the curves have flattened. Very few critical care facilities were ever overrun – and what’s more, many hospitals were deserted, having most of their routine work cancelled, the consequences of which we’re yet to fully come to grips with.

Some countries like Sweden that endured lighter measures, didn’t suffer worse outcomes, suggesting that the natural history of the disease and natural immunity may have been as important if not more important in flattening the curve than complete lockdowns.

  • Find related articles, information and videos in our Covid Zone

Non-mainstream UK media channel UnHerd interviewed the ex-head of the European Centre for Disease Control, Swedish professor Johan Giesecke, only to follow it up with Imperial College’s Professor Neil Ferguson. The fundamental differences in the views of both epidemiologists were palpable – all good fodder for a news channel. But also a reminder why governments seem so unclear about which measures work or how to exit from the various degrees of lockdown. 

Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve seen unprecedented censorship of free expression on major social media platforms, with presentations by people like Dr Rashid Buttar being regularly banned, only to be re-posted by followers before being censored again.

We’ve witnessed the establishment of a crowd-funded new media platform, the Digital Freedom Platform, free from censorship on London Real, the brainchild of ex-banker turned journalist, Brian Rose

We’ve seen doctors and nurses speak out, questioning the rationale of the measures and protocols they’re being asked to follow.

And, very significantly, a key legal challenge has been launched in Ireland, arguing the lockdown measures and potential for mandatory vaccines are unconstitutional.

Following are just a few of these dissenting voices - we're aware there are many more:

Drs Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi from Accelerated Urgent Care, California, USA - press conference (6:09)
Broadcast date: 22 April 2020
Link to full conference


Prof Knut M Wittkowski PhD, Epidemiologist, USA (1:04:25)
Publication date:
28 April 2020


Prof Johan Giesecke, Sweden (34:53)
Why lockdowns are the wrong policy
Publication date: 17 April 2020


Gemma O'Doherty and John Waters at The High Court Dublin, Ireland (3:24)
Broadcast date: 21 April 2020


Sara - Nurse/Practitioner Whistleblower, USA (10:25)
Publication date:
26 April 2020


Podcast - Cheryl Comley, Washington Post, USA (33:03)
Government Gone Wild

It's not just COVID-19 that is bringing about a government that's gone wild with the dictatorial style of leadership -- though the coronavirus is leading to some serious constitutional dings. But in Texas, the Supreme Court has a case of eye-opening proportions that's seeing a fit and proper biological dad having to fight for custody of his little girl -- because another guy who used to live with the girl feels like he's a dad. It's Real Dad vs Fake Dad, and Jeremy Newman with the Texas Home School Coalition has the shocking story.

Find related articles, information and videos in our Covid Zone