Scrutiny of lockdown

sir – By suggesting that the world is now full of armchair Covid experts, Dr Jenny Jessop (Letters, March 8) misses the important point about The Lockdown Files.

Putting aside the facts that lockdowns were never part of Britain’s pandemic planning and were an unproven method to control the transmission of a virus about which we knew very little, they were simply undemocratic and an assault on civil liberties.

Few would argue that this was not a very contagious virus and was initially deadly to many older, vulnerable people. However, The Lockdown Files show that a group of all-powerful politicians often ignored their own government scientists (even well after the first lockdown was over), followed opinion polls rather than “the science”, and used unethical tactics to engender fear over a sustained period.

Lockdown was a nonpharmacological treatment with no proven efficacy and with obvious potential for harm. We knew this at the time of its instigation and it is now vital that we investigate how and why it was imposed upon the nation.

Dr David Walters

Burton Bradstock, Dorset

sir – During the second and third lockdowns, like many other sensible citizens, I saw little point in maskwearing.

Consequently, I frequently found myself in conflict with Government guidelines, and people paid to implement them.

I discovered that arts institutions were among the bossiest, least forgiving and most enthusiastic deliverers of this virtue-signalling policy: on one occasion I was publicly chastised by a front-of-house busybody for not wearing a mask “properly”. Twice I was banned for life, first by a West End theatre, then by a major art gallery.

In light of what we – and they – now know, can I look forward to an official apology and to having my bans lifted? Veronica Timperley London W1