Over the past couple of days, a particular Facebook post has gone viral. The post has been shared and commented on thousands of times. It entails how the country’s Chief Medical Officer, Chris Witty, has endured online abuse in mass proportions regarding his appearance. However, it coincides with extraordinary admiration for the work he is doing for the country. Two separate points which need to be explored and dissected: the abuse he receives, and secondly the praise.
Firstly, the abuse is abhorrent. I condemn every person who joins in the masses in the abuse of a civil servant or any other human being for that matter. From members of the Twitter community labelling him as testing ‘positive for being creep as f***’; to ‘Chris Witty looks like he snatches children’. No matter if you are on the left, centre or right; these comments are inexcusable and must be denounced. As a psychology graduate and mental health advocate I plea that people stop. This is bullying and cannot be viewed in any other light.
We have seen with many individuals whether they are in the public spotlight or not, bullying can cause significant decline in an individual’s mental health and wellbeing. In some individuals it can prompt them to take their own lives, Caroline Flack a very recent and notable example.
Nevertheless, in the post Facebook users have shared copious amounts of praise for Chris Witty for the work he is doing. Part of the status mentioned ‘he is the best chance…at beating the virus’, while ending the post with ‘let’s show this guy the respect and credit he deserves’; and also advising people to ‘take a minute to read about him’. If the public took time to read about him and dissect the timeline of Britain’s response (which he led) to the virus and the strategy deployed – there is only one monumental conclusion that can be made. Chris Witty was unsuccessful in saving lives, but saving lives was NOT one of his motives in the first place, making the healthy population of Britain immune to the disease while sacrificing vulnerable lives was his motive. As a result, he is succeeding with his advised strategy, which is to ensure the virus passes through the nation.
On Friday 13th March, Chris Witty confirmed the government were implementing a “herd immunity” strategy in response to COVID-19. He admitted that 40 million people would contract the virus, at the time (even though he would have been fully appraised) he failed to mention that this would see abhorrent levels of deaths as result. However, he softened this somewhat during the interview saying we would protect ‘the most vulnerable’. Thereafter, the vulnerable were not protected and are still not being protected on a momentous level. It took 48 days from the first UK case of COVID-19 to deploy a mediocre measure of advising the vulnerable to isolate. Today 1st April, we saw over 500 people die, the majority elderly or had underlying medical conditions. The elderly and vulnerable were told far too late that to save their own life they must isolate for twelve weeks. This left them exposed to the virus, hence why we are now seeing mass avoidable deaths in a very short period of time.
If Chris Witty was really ‘saving the country’ like one user commented on the post mentioned, Chris would be advising and implementing more restrictions for the vulnerable. Such as, implementing more guidelines that would meet zero contact with the virus, the army and volunteers delivering disinfected parcels with essential items so that the virus cannot enter the households of the vulnerable. They would expand guidelines on exercise and make it law to minimise the risk of vulnerable individuals contracting the virus. They could make it illegal to visit people over the age of 70 or those with health issues until the outbreak is over to protect them. All plausible strategies which are not being installed by the government and Chris Witty. In essence when Chris said the ‘vulnerable would be protected’ while implementing ‘herd immunity’, he was lying.
Now, when people share the same status who condemn abuse towards Chris, yet praise him too, I will not join in this praiseand I urge you to do the same. Chris Witty failed to act out of any compassion or care for the vulnerable, instead he only acted when it was clear that too many deaths at one time would surely cause the NHS to break down and unable to recover. His act was one to lessen the burden on the infrastructure of our healthcare to prevent collapse and not because he valued the lives of the loved ones many of us will lose as a result. His change of path was to flatten the curve and not stop it altogether. Chris Witty has contributed to the mass genocide of the British elderly and vulnerable by taking too long to respond. He has allowed the virus to slowly spread throughout our society. Action came three weeks too late, and not enough action is being taken. We are now seeing more than 500 deaths per day and this is because Chris and the government wanted 60% of us to be immune. A total of 2,352 deaths (mostly vulnerable) and 29,474 infected is proof Chris Witty has failed abysmally to protect us and our loved ones. From the outset Chris Witty wanted herd immunity and wanted the infections and deaths to be ‘broadened’. Chris doesn’t need praise; he needs to be held accountable for theblood on his hands.
Davey Gray
