Two audience members stood out: a man with a philosophy degree who came armed with a list of reputed side-effects, to which it was pointed out that side-effects exist with any medication, even an aspirin, and that the risks of Covid far outweigh those of the jab.

Then a woman who insisted she was public spirited, she just had her doubts and didn’t understand why natural immunity wasn’t good enough (she’d had Covid in the past). Prof Shattock explained that we cannot measure the individual’s degree of natural immunity precisely, so the vaccine is far more effective and reliable.

“If I could measure your current antibodies level,” the prof asked the woman, “and say it was beneath a protective threshold, would that encourage you to get the vaccine?” She said it could. This was an effective exchange, inviting the viewer to assess the woman’s initial concerns, weigh up the facts and then witness, in turn, the processing of that information, to see its impact. This was a great example of journalism that shows rather than tells.