Unsurprisingly, there have been a few analogies made about this situation being a war type scenario.
In the first instance, identifying ones enemy is vital - obviously our enemy here is CV19.
Then the next vital stage is intelligence gathering which must be an ongoing process. This covers finding everything out one can about the enemy, it's "plans" and the likely consequences. Much has already been done in this area in the last four months, starting on other countries, and sharing information with allies to provide a co-ordinated response when a threat is global is logical and good practise.
As evidence solidifies it is important to pass on the correct information to the population for the war effort, so they can come together (metaphorically) and help reduce risk and impact under the solid guidance of the "generals". and make relevant contributions.
In this scenario data about our enemy is not being gathered efficiently, and what is available is vague, ever changing and sometimes downright inconsistent. This of course leads to conflict within the population about how best to proceed, conspiracy theorising and opens up the opportunity for the less scrupulous to take advantage, leading in a worst case scenario to civil unrest requiring authoritarian measures and diverting resources from other important areas such as managing and protecting our infrastructure, and ensuring the most vulnerable are protected.
Given that the first bit of my analogy is being utterly ignored in the UK - intelligence gathering via robust testing, I can see why people are concluding that something else is going on too,
In a real war scenario, there is an argument for witholding sensitive information to safeguard defence operations and prevent panic, particularly if things are unsubstantiated, but this applies less here in this situation. Good education, honesty and transparency is essential to prevent societal breakdown.
BoJo's speech regarding deaths was the first thing that really showed the seriousness of the problem to the UK public, and was a stark contrast to the "it probably won't be that bad" refrain peddled by everyone pretty much up to that point.
Cruising the boards there are now many threads where people are getting closer and closer to the enemy on a personal level, but we don't even know if it is the real enemy - mass isolation when a percentage may well be a bad cold leading to economic repercussions is not a balanced approach. I'm in this group of people now - not knowing if someone close to me with serious symptoms, with whom I had close contact last week has CV19 or "just" the worst normal flu she has ever experienced. I can't just abandon my housebound terminally ill mother on the frigging off chance. This sort of decision making should be done when fully informed. I don't like playing Russian roulette.