"Testing and tracing only serves to identify the problem.
Lockdown and 'Social Distancing' are measures that can actually be effective.
So to say that tracing and testing are an effective way to "battle the virus" is totally wrong, even if it does come from a self-proclaimed 'scientist'."

Hmmm. Maybe I shouldn't be responding to an ill-thought out post containing a gratuitous personal insult (parroting the self-same insult cheerfully employed by you-know-who...) However. We have yet to see solid evidence that a "lockdown" (that still permits crowded buses, tube trains and workplaces) can be effective. Testing, contact tracing (and subsequent action with regard to those tested positive, it should go without saying, but who knows with you, Nigel?) have been shown to be effective in China, Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea. At least one of those places hasn't even needed a lockdown. Spain and Italy both have severe lockdowns, but you'd have to try very hard to persuade a lot of people that they've somehow done much good. It stands to reason that knowing who is infected, who isn't, and preferably also who has recovered, gives a country a good head start in controlling the outbreak. And I'll unscientifically predict that the mass testing in Germany will shortly be seen to have paid dividends.