Quote Originally Posted by TWGL1 View Post
Sage, at this time, were predicting a reasonable worst-case planning scenario, of 250,000 deaths which was why the public didn’t require to have a risk assessment.

Those who attended the gathering must have had a risk assessment, based on the modelling. If they didn’t I personally couldn’t see how the party would have been authorised. But that is my take on it, unless they thought the SAGE modelling was questionable?

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...-29-march-2020
I have read your first sentence a number of times and still don't have a scooby what it means. That's notwithstanding the fact that the document you attached says nothing whatsoever about 250k deaths, which I presume you got from Imperial College's initial analysis of what would happen if no restrictions were imposed.

Witter on about risk analysis all you like. This is about the people who made the rules living by a completely different set. Pure and simple!