I’m curious why you’re interpreting it as transmission was stopped entirely. Clearly that’s not what was meant given that the weekly deaths still were above zero.

I'm curious as to why you're interpreting the "entirely" as stopping transmission.

I meant, is it entirely the cause of the massive drop (to near nil) that year?

You didn't answer the main point of my post with any information.

You just deflected on the first word, which you interpreted wrong in the first place.

Still haven't seen a source on this claim, noone has in this thread.

So link please?

> I'm curious as to why you're interpreting the "entirely" as stopping transmission.

You were replying to:

> Isolation during corona/covid prevented the transmission of disease.

Because transmission was the singular subject of the parent comment. You failed to include the necessary context to make your point clear.

> So link please?

Yeah, I’m not inclined to go find something like that for a claim I didn’t make. What I will offer is an analogy for why I have no problem accepting the claim to be quite convincing. If we were to put a filter in an air stream and observe that the concentration of 5 micron particles has been significantly reduced downstream of the filter, would we really need to be skeptical of a claim that the filter was responsible for nearly completely eliminating 20 micron particles downstream? While the effectiveness of this analogy is of course going to hinge on how well the arbitrary numbers line up with reality, I find the explanation far more likely than the alternative of some combination of gross, universal incompetence and conspiracy.