My apologies for getting my terminology wrong.
However you have not commented on the question I was asking - will natural biological differences mean that some people will not be susceptible (or will be much less susceptible) to this virus?
You know the answer to that. Some people get very slight symptoms, exactly why is not yet known. It would be unwise to assume that that will remain the case. The
Kansas Spanish flue of 1918 had an initial mild wave that only killed infants, the elderly and the sick. The second wave was much more deadly and killed young people in their physical prime. Different American cities applied different strategies to deal with the flu, in that experiment those that went for lockdowns, had fewer deaths.
It's often a good idea to run different experiments in parallel to see which is best, or whether there is any difference,
I know that is a facetious comment, but there is a germ of truth in it. Whatever the outcome may be in the UK (or anywhere else) the politicians and everyone who was in favour of the strategy will claim that it would have been much worse otherwise and there can be no evidence to contradict them.
Well I think that is an experiment I would rather not take part in. New York is saying it is just days away from running out of vital equipment and supples. In China thay have manages to contain the spread and in some areas they have the new infections down to single digits per day. Guess what those single digit areas are doing, they are building hospital beds and buying ventilators.
This is going to be a real game changer for the global economy. China was already a powerhouse, after this crisis I think they are going to be positioned to become extremely dominant while the West will be in disarray.