Or propaganda? You choose.

Tonight’s Breathtaking episode depicts a doctor slamming the Government for not locking down earlier, in one of its most political scenes yet.

In the final segment of ITV‘s gripping three-part Covid drama, Dr Abbey Henderson decides to expose the horrors she saw during the height of the pandemic.

Days earlier the fictional consultant – played by Downton Abbey‘s Joanne Froggatt – is ominously warned ‘the NHS eats whistleblowers alive’ by a hospital executive who she confided in.

In the same episode, doctors are spat at and told the virus is a hoax by a group of protestors outside the hospital.

I go with propaganda. There was no need to lockdown at all. We had a couple of bad flu seasons and the NHS coped as it usually does – badly. And of course, those of us who disagreed are portrayed as conspiracy theorists who spit at people. Cardboard cut-out villains.

An exasperated Dr Henderson is seen telling the hospital executive: ‘People won’t understand what they don’t see. They don’t believe hospitals are full. They don’t believe that this virus kills people and why would they.

Because the government’s own statistics tell a different story. Covid was no more deadly at the height of its virulence than seasonal flu – killing around 1% of those who caught it, and then it was people who were already compromised. Healthy people got over it, just as they get over flu. This is hysterical nonsense peddled in a television drama. It was bullshit when it was for real, it is bullshit now it’s a TV programme.

However, some evidence has since questioned the effectiveness of blanket lockdowns, which crippled the economy and had devastating knock-on effects on the NHS and other sectors of society.

Well, duh! This was blindingly obvious to anyone with a functioning braincell at the time.

I will give this one a pass, thanks all the same.


  1. Like you l will give this a miss. I do differ a bit on the issue of lockdowns though.
    The first one, l think, could be defended as a precaution because there was not a huge amount of data available initially. A similar argument might just be possible for the second but after that l don’t think there was any (non political) justification.
    That said, l was an early signer of the Great Barrington Declaration so would have preferred a different solution anyway.

    • By the time of the first lockdown, we were past the peak, so it wasn’t justified. Also, by the second one, we had more than enough information to keep going as normal. Like you, I favoured the Great Barrington solution.

      • “those of us who disagreed are portrayed as conspiracy theorists who spit at people”

        LR, as an aside, I found the term ‘conspiracy theorists’ very interesting a long ago. If you think about the meaning (I hasten add I don’t claim to be a wordsmith, I even struggle to write a sentence with my current state, but I can think), you will find that the term is nonsense, a conspiracy theorist is impossible to exist, or should say, those two words are exclusive, so they cannot co-exist.

        My thought is this – if a conspiracy does exist, then this is simply a conspiracy, a criminal, to cause harm, so no need for theory, as everyone knows that conspiracy occurred and why, albeit some people look for truthful facts as to the why details (that is called ‘reading news or watch the tv news’, believing is irrelevant).

        If a conspiracy not does exist, then a theory cannot exist.

        This works with Boolean logic in electronics it is either true or false but not both.

        The correct term is these people should be ‘conspiracy truth seeker’. This sounds makes much sense. I did a bit more digging about the ‘conspiracy theorist’ term around the 90s. Apparent this term was coined by CIA about the 70s or later, used to smear people as loonies to shut them up when someone came too close to truth. I bet that you’ve noted how people afraid (I don’t know why, it’s just a name) by be labelled. To my mind, the term tells me more about the name caller, than about the ‘theorist’. If you any interest, read about the CIA program – MKUltra, this was declassified about 1975, MKUltra ran for around 1954 and its easy to find. The documents will raise your eyebrows.

        • I would have thought that is someone has a thought that it is a conspiracy then it is an untested theory. A conspiracy theory. On testing is can be a conspiracy or not but which being investigated it is a theory.

          • Lord T – I appreciate what you are saying, however, a conspiracy is ‘plan’ made up by one or any number people, to do harm to another person. This a crime, so the conspiracy either (1) happened or (2) did not happen. The case in (1) has to be proven by way of investigated that the conspiracy indeed happened. That can’t be a theory.

            Obviously, in a case of (2) is no theory.

            A theory is a simple question – ‘is it possible that this works way?’, and as in science, the theory is investigated and tested. These are peer reviews papers, in which the theory eventual arrive at truth or false or not proven.

            The term is constructed for only one reason, simply to make a person sound as if he/her lose their mind, mad, loony – which way you want describe. This tactic is dates as a least back at Goebells, and the tactic got picked up by the Marxism.


          • It would be a theory if it is unknown but suspected. Once exposed, it is no longer a theory but a demonstrable fact.

            As for the loony point. Indeed. However, the troofers are pretty barking. I’ve had run-ins with these people and they string unrelated points together to produce a completely insane theory, that can easily be disproved. Indeed, I did disprove their claims about Peter Power, providing a perfectly rational explanation from my own experience in that field yet they simply ignored any evidence as it contradicted their pet beliefs. A bit like the government, really.

    • The preventative measures for a pandemic, in place for decades, never included a lockdown. They just changed all that at the drop of a hat. The fact that it happened almost everywhere suddenly is very suspicious to say the least, in that it shows that politicians are just following each other.

      I know for a fact that in France, the very people in charge of dealing with pandemics (not their only jobs) were pushed aside by macron and were never involved.

    • Phil, I can see your point here but under examination it doesn’t hoild up. We had plans in place refined over decades for dealing with a pandemic. The brain farts that were our political leaders binned that and came up with their own. I suspect that they just followed everyone else because to do something different was risk for them directly. TBH I understand that and can accept it. What I don’t accept is when it became apparent it was a mistake they doubled down and still went on. Crushing disenting voices with the rule of law. Even ow they are still pushing Covid vaccines where they had to change the definition of vaccine to allow it to be called a vaccine.

      Many crimes were committed here and they need to be punished.

  2. The reason for the first lockdown was simply the political optics.
    Italy, that famously courageous and logical nation, had already imposed a lockdown. If Britain had not done likewise, then the death of every creakingly-frail and geriatric granny would have been laid at the doorstep of Number Ten. ‘Boris the Granny Killer’, you can imagine the tabloid headlines, and so could the government, so they bottled and locked-down. Then, after doing it once, it became harder to justify not doing it again when presented with similar (and similarly flaky) data.
    The rest is history, and hysteria.

  3. Not seen it, but according to a friend, it’s a fake retelling of the covid days given that it doesn’t feature bored, dancing nhs nurses.

    • You mean bored, fat, dancing NHS nurses? Any of the fat, unhealthy looking ones I have seen wouldn’t make a poster child for Famine in Africa (and not because of skin colour, if you know what I mean).

  4. My first thought when I read “They don’t believe hospitals are full…” that they are right not to believe it because they have seen first hand that they are empty.

  5. I am not an epidemiologist but neil ferguson’s record of predictions was quite easy to find and he had never been right before hand so why did they trust him in 2020?
    Any GP with that truck record would have been struck off.

  6. The WHO website said, and still says “Most people infected with the virus will experience mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment.” I think that the government locked down the population because everyone else was doing it.

  7. “Days earlier the fictional consultant …”

    Yeah, fic-tion-al. Not real. Fake. Phoney. Pretend.

    They’re trying to say that this “exposes the reality of hospitals during the lockdowns”, or some such nonsense. No, what exposed the reality of hospitals during the lockdowns was non-fictional videos of genuine nurses dancing through bona-fide empty wards and the government verifiably spunking millions of pounds on authentic emergency hospitals that were never used.

    Sure, the virus killed people. All viruses kill some people. But this virus, contrary to the confident predictions of those absurd computer models and the desperate attempts of third-rate dramatists to pretend otherwise, was never going to kill everybody.

    • There are very good arguments to show that the actions taken actually killed more people than they saved.

      PR Raoult said that sending people home who tested positive with a small o2 meter you wear on your finger to check for your blood o2 levels would have saved a lot of people. The reason being that once your o2 level is too low, you get in a state of euphory when you’re actually dying. By the time you get to hospital, it’s too late.

      There are so many reasons to hang them all.

  8. What ever happened to the Great Ventilator Shortage and the scandal of cronies supplying them.
    Did they really kill old folk who had serious lung infection.
    I remember when I first heard of the need for ventilators I thought it was a fix for the hot stifling atmosphere all hospitals have.
    Which I think is why staff are overweight. Because they cannot burn off calories and the heat discourages excess effort.

  9. the NHS became the Covid 19 NHS and onli the ICU were full. Hospitals were otherwise shockingly empty. There should never have been any lockdowns for healthy adults. This TV drama is utter bollocks.

Comments are closed.