Two people, person A and person B. Who is the fastest driver? My hypothesis is person A as they have held their licence longer and currently drive a sports car. How do we prove who is faster? By having them go on a race track.

So we now have a variable we want to test, the driver. We therefore need to eliminate or keep constant the other variables. They are, the car - so we ensure they drive the same car, the race track - so we ensure they drive the same track...

The weather - so we try to ensure the weather conditions are the same...and so on. Next, they both complete one circuit and we time them both - whoever completes the circuit in the shortest time is the fastest driver.

Person A completed the circuit in 4:23, person B completed it in 4:04. The time being the measure is used to draw the conclusion that person B is the faster driver....and thus my hypothesis is proven incorrect.

Though in the real world, we would repeat the race several times to eliminate chance too!

Now apply the above example to data collected in relation to the current pandemic we face. Have as many variables as possible been eliminated or kept constant to draw sound conclusions? Unfortunately, in my opinion, no they have not.

So whether you're "pro" or "anti lockdown". You must be Pro Science and as members of the public, we should be keeping everyone honest about how these decisions are being made.