There's so much we don't know - or aren't being told - about this very un-brave new world we find ourselves existing in.
But one thing that really perplexes me is the opinion polls. Time after time, lockdown after lockdown, surveys suggest that a substantial majority of the public are in favour of these extreme measures.
Take the latest YouGov poll, which claimed that 79% of people support yet another national lockdown. That's up by 8% from a similar poll on December 22.
I could understand this if we were back in March last year, when little was known about the dangers or otherwise of Covid.
People were panicking and so were politicians. Few of us knew, back then, how flawed, exaggerated and wildly inaccurate theoretical modelling could be. Spooked western governments ditched existing evidence-based pandemic advice - which ruled out experimental, untried and unproven strategies like lockdowns - and forced people to hide in their homes.
That was then. But this is now: January 2021. And we know a great deal more about this unpleasant disease.
We have learned that vulnerability to death from Covid is more than a thousand-fold higher in the elderly and infirm than the young. For healthy people under 70, the infection fatality rate (IFR) is 0.05%. Children are barely affected at all.
As for lockdowns themselves, it is increasingly clear that they simply don't work. The hard data shows that there is no significant difference in the death rates between countries that locked down hard, locked down more lightly, or did not lock down at all.
You don't even need to be a scientist to understand that lockdowns and other so-called "non-pharmaceutical interventions" are woefully ineffective at containing the spread of coronavirus.
You only need to look at what is happening in the world around you. If lockdowns were successful, if the enforced wearing of cloth masks worked, why are we in lockdown, yet again, with cases through the roof and hospitals under such dreadful pressure? Whatever Arlene says, it can't just be because a few people went to Portrush and Portstewart.
We do know that lockdowns kill and maim, from undiagnosed cancer sufferers to suicidal teenagers to battered infants. Right now, as we speak, our children are having their futures trashed: denied their education, cut off from their friends, traumatised by the destruction of their normal everyday lives.
And yet still, incredibly, most people support lockdowns.
Yes please, they say. Keep shutting us down harder and harder, in the absence of any evidence that it will work, that the lives of the elderly will be saved, and despite all the horrific harms it causes, the decades of suffering it will bring, especially to our own children.
Fear is probably the number one answer. Being frightened switches off the rational parts of your mind, distorts your thinking and makes you less capable of weighing up proportionate risk.
But fear is not the only reason.
I suspect that many people believe that there is genuinely no alternative to lockdown measures. They have drunk the government's Kool-Aid, as the Americans say, buying wholesale into the official myth that the authorities are capable of controlling the virus, and that nothing else - such as focusing massively on protecting the elderly and vulnerable - will work.
Maybe some don't even know about the case against lockdowns. Much of the broadcast media, itself awash with gallons of Kool-Aid, isn't going to tell them, is it?
Moral pressure also plays its part in ensuring that people swear allegiance to the creed. Who wants to be labelled a granny-killer or a Covid-denier? There is a nasty mood of censorship, enforced conformism and intolerance of dissent. This week, YouTube took a radio station off its platform because it included interviews with critics of lockdown.
The writer and trade unionist Paul Embery was recently deluged by a wave of especially vicious abuse on Twitter. Why? Merely for stating, without comment, the official NHS fact that the total number of Covid-related deaths in England involving people under 60, and free from a pre-existing condition, is 377. For this single tweet, Embery was dubbed a eugenicist, a fascist, a madman who should be strung up from the nearest lamp-post.
And finally, there is the mysterious phenomenon that psychologists call cognitive dissonance. This means that when confronted with evidence which disproves their beliefs, many people will cling even harder to their original viewpoint, since this is less painful than admitting they got it wrong. The idea that all that effort, all those sacrifices, might have been for nothing is seen as unbearable.
But what's even worse, to my mind, is continuing to support failed policies, because we cannot face up to the facts.