I wouldn't mind that as a conclusion at all -- problem is we're not seeing any such rational comparative investigative analysis. Presumably you're not suggesting we have? Why we're not I don't understand. Why is the fixation with new cases still with us? It's the most meaningless statistic in the whole debate. Why have none of the major TV stations arranged for a full debate on the data? They did so often enough over Brexit; but here we actually have questions that can be answered without comeback on key areas of the debate, based on quantitative analysis, not on opinions and conclusions based on flimsy, untested data, never put to rigorous review - has there ever been a more blatant attempt at swaying minds by scaremongering and abuse of figures than that disgraceful TV appearance on Monday by Whitty and Parlance? No wonder there was no use of Zoom to allow questions to be asked of them; the pair of them would have been pulled apart and quickly shown to be there not to educate but to simply strike more fear (not I suppose that the questions would have been allowed if they'd have possibly shown the presentation for what it was).
PS - You're conclusion to my post suggests you've swallowed one of cop outs to preventing meaningful comparison of inter-country differences in contagion etc by referring to 'social/behaviour of our country'. We have in Europe what are akin to two very different real 'experiments' in how is the best way to proceed. Both need to be thoroughly assessed. As far as I am aware, there is as yet no scientific evidence that would put UK 'behaviours' as a differentiating factor. We really shouldn't be allowing our ruling politicians to get away with that as an excuse for their own failures in the policy fiasco to date.