@snuggywormskl_m@EssexPR I canβt speak for how people interpret it but the original post suggests there are 2 articles giving conflicting information when in fact they are reporting on 2 different things.
@snuggywormskl_m@EssexPR The point of the story is that in the 10 days after the first lockdown the case number didnβt reduce, therefore reaffirming the point that lockdowns donβt have an instant benefit. You can only now look back at data to prove this theory as you need to let time pass to see results
@EssexPR They are two different date ranges, the first talks about 10 days directly after the lockdown and the other talks about between 10-17th Jan so itβs plausible both are true.