Early in the piece, here is the critical sentence: > I do not find that lockdowns are a more effective way of handling coronavirus than well-done social-distan

Early in the piece, here is the critical sentence: > I do not find that lockdowns are a more effective way of handling coronavirus than well-done social-distancing measures. Properly done physical-distancing measures will accomplish everything needed. Lockdowns are not needed if people will observe proper, well-executed physical distancing. So why issue instructions for lockdowns? My guess is this: Without strict "by the book", precisely specified, overly prescriptive detailed instructions, many people don't properly practice effective physical distancing. The idea is that the lockdown gives an additional "margin of error" for enforcement and social disapproval to take effect. There are some real idiots out there, and the government guidelines/instructions have to take that into account when they consider enforcement and practice.