Yes
I keep reviewing all the published evidence, I don't see any material link between the 'lockdown light' and better epidemiological results.
Vaccination aside (important point though it is); the failures in Ontario are about a lot of other things; I don't think one can say that Toronto having suffered the longest 'lockdown' on the continent benefited from same.
I have no time for anti-maskers, anti-vaxxers etc etc.
I'm all for good policy that protects the most people, practically.
But I don't see the evidence this policy works.
In fact, I see some evidence it makes it worse.
The more you diffuse people (by which I mean spread them out), the less transmission you get.
The more time spent outdoors, same.
Yet the focus has been on putting more people into less space, indoors (lockdown).
If the results were counter-intuitive, that would be one thing; but they aren't. Everything I see points to 'lockdown' producing a worse result.
****
LTCs aside, we never did expend the effort to move more things outdoors where practical. Be that school classes; or upending private golf clubs in favour of walking/biking/picnic space etc.
In the end, to me, neither fear, nor indifference should drive public policy; evidence should.