Hi Chapper,
I missed this. What a tremendously detailed analysis. I used Deepl Translator to understand it. The math was a little beyond me, but I believe I understand the argument.

BMI does fit in with other blogs you have written. And it makes sense. However, I believe you indicate that lockdowns didn't seem to correlate with a reduction in infection rate. As you know I live in the U. S. Here we are sort of a laboratory for correlating COVID infections with behavior. The different states came out of lockdown at different times. It's pretty easy to track those that opened carelessly and subsequent infection rates. I live in New York. We got hit hard, the hardest in the country, at first. People were dying. People we knew were dying. We went into a pretty strict lockdown. As we slowly opened up, the governor got serious about masks and social distancing. The rates tracked our behavior--one of the lowest infection rates in the country now. Georgia and Florida opened up fast, much faster than CDC guidelines suggested. Refused to have a statewide mask mandate. Their rates skyrocketed--are skyrocketing now. Of course there can be other factors contributing to New York's decline and their rise, but it seems that you can track an increase to occur within a few weeks or month after irresponsible opening up.

We're pretty much open now in New York, except everyone has to wear a mask in public and social distancing mandates are still in effect. If our numbers start going up, the governor is going to clamp down again. By the way, he did this in conjunction with two neighboring states, which probably helped to make the lockdown more effective.

Hope you don't mind my long comment. I so respect the work you did here.
Be well and enjoy the last days of August.
Warm regards,
AG