We don’t know that social distancing has done anything. There is zero proof that masks have done anything.
How do we “know” anything. It seems obvious but as this thread demonstrates, it seems it’s not?
It is true that we have not demonstrated using rigorous scientific observation and method that social distancing works, and I’ve often seen this used by Covid sceptics to argue against containment measures. The argument goes “there’s no proof X, Y or Z works, so why should we comply”.
However, to achieve this we would need, firstly, one suitably large and diverse population isolated and infected with Covid and scrupulously obeying a set of social distancing rules, and another equivalent population infected with Covid in which social distancing did not take place. The results would be analysed over a period, and conclusions drawn. The study would need to be peer reviewed to provide assurance over the rigour of the methodology, testing and interpretation. Ideally this “experiment” would be repeated a number of times with slightly different parameters, and a synthesis of the results drawn in conclusions that - if broadly consistent - would form a scientific consensus. However, this is clearly impossible, not to mention unethical. To insist on such a hurdle being cleared before public health policy can be set is ludicrous, and nothing could be ever be done (which is exactly what the libertarians want).
Expecting “proof“ in such a scenario is as ridiculous as refusing to be drawn over whether carrying a pan of boiling water down the stairs on your head isn’t safe, because a scientific study hasn’t proven whether it is dangerous, or refusing to jump out of the path of a moving train because you don’t have definitive evidence that moving to the left or the right is the more suitable alternative.
The world’s response to Covid, by necessity, involved applying the wide breadth of knowledge it did have about infectious diseases to determine a course of action that was reasonable and consistent with what we knew. Given that evidence indicates that Covid’s primary mode
of transmission via the respiratory droplets, distancing people socially so that droplets from their breath cannot be passed from one to another is a very reasonable thing to do, obvious even.
Has it been irrefutably and rigorously scientifically demonstrated that social distancing works? “No”, that would be impossible for the reasons given
Do we need such “proof“ for confidence to be highly confident that it does have an impact? Again, “no”, the body of evidence we do have, coupled with reasonable deductions, is enough for very high level of confidence that social distancing does help prevent Covid transmission..... in the same way I’m highly confident that carrying a pan of boiling water down stairs on my head is dangerous, despite the absence of a double blind scientific study demonstrating this.