There are so many details that sounds odd in combination, even if individually they are plausible, For example the eyesight. I found this on a glaucoma site:


Coronavirus may cause pink eye — but it’s rare
If you see someone with pink eye, don’t panic. It doesn’t mean that person is infected with coronavirus. But health officials believe viral pink eye, or conjunctivitis, develops in about 1% to 3% of people with coronavirus. The virus can spread by touching discharge from an infected person’s eyes.


So lets assume the mid point 2%. One person in 50. Plausible.

But then we hear both he and the Prime Minister had it: as these are independent events, that's now one in 2500. Starting to look dodgy, wouldn't you say?

Then there is the odd detail of the four your old needing the toilet in Barnard Castle (Which I know well: my in-laws lived there for 15 years)

What we always did when the children were small was check if they had been to the toilet before we got in the car, even it was just a trip to the supermarket. You don't want to be stuck in a traffic jam in the middle of a housing estate with a wailing child wanting the toilet. So, as I say, we always ensured they went to the toilet before they left the house and I think all the parents I now did, often after bitter experience. So, they leave the house for a 'short' 30 mile drive and, while there, the child needs the toilet.   A day of so later, they take the child on a 260 mile drive.

Yes, I understand four year olds can be unpredictable in such matters. But it seems far more likely that either there was a lot more than the journey time between the two toilet trips, or else there would be several stops on the 260 mile journey.   So while not impossible, it is a curious detail that doesn't seem too likely.

Incidentally, if you suddenly feel unwell and have to sit and rest after taking 30 mile which was expressly to determine if you were well enough to do the 260 mile one the next day, wouldn't you conclude the answer is 'no'?