I quite agree Lannis.
So far our lot have been called out on over-egging the "died following a test" numbers & had to revise the figures substantially downwards. The revised figures still don't say how many have actually died directly from (or from complications attribulatable to) the virus - just those who died "within 28 days of a positive test result". You could have no symptoms & not feel unwell, but test "positive" and then by run over by a bus a fortnight later and you would be a Covid statistic. Crazy.
The same group of Oxford academics who caused the change in "death rates" are now calling out the test results - their research suggesting that the sensitivity of the test is such that it categorising people as currently having the disease when in fact they have had it & recovered. In many case these people have had no or mild symptoms weeks or months ago, but the test is so sensitive it picks up dead virus fragments from the immune system having sucessfully defeated the virus & reports a "positive" result. So healthy people are being forced to self isolate when they pose no risk to anyone.
These increased "positive tests" don't seem to be causing increases in hospital admissions or death rates - so the narrative doesn't fit the statistics, even when the statistics appear to be being skewed to bias the results.
Perhaps our lot need a new set of "experts" ?