Original Royal Society report: https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/impact-non-pharmaceutical-interventions-on-covid-19-transmission/covid-19-examin

Original Royal Society report: https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/impact-non-pharmaceutical-interventions-on-covid-19-transmission/covid-19-examining-the-effectiveness-of-non-pharmaceutical-interventions-executive-summary.pdf https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/impact-non-... It's too bad that the report has a quite vague description of its methodology and data sources and analysis. From what I read it's mostly a qualitative assessment more than anything else. Also the big elephant in the room is conflict of interest. While the report states "by a group of expert scientists convened by the Royal Society, independently from the UK Government", they're all funded by the government (most public health experts are) including the Royal Society itself. The next statement confirms that the UK public health office was involved in the drafting of the document: "The Royal Society is most grateful for early comments from the then UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, in helping the Society to refine the concept of this report and ensuring it has value for future science advisers and decision makers. I can't help of thinking that the government asked experts they fund to investigate itself and they found nothing wrong.