Originally Posted by samc

Again. Not what I said. It is what you inferred from what I said. If you would like to argue that lockdown didn’t reduce transmission over the period then please do.

So if we executed a lockdown, increased mask usage and a few other things and R dropped by .5, then it is likely that lockdown contributed something to the drop in R. So if you’d like to argue that we would have reached the decreased R without lockdown, given the other measures we took; then go ahead.

That’s what it would take to invalidate my statement. Unless you can argue that lockdown did not contribute to a decrease in R.