Coronavirus: Is it true that the UK measures are ‘making a difference’?

The BBC reports that Sir Patrick Vallance told a news conference that social distancing measures are “making a difference” [LINK].

However, can this be proved?

We know that in Sweden, the death rate is far lower, and they have decided to do very little [LINK].

Peter Hitchens gave an example, on the lines that a doctor tells the patient, we shall cut your leg of to cure your cold. After a few days, the patients cold is gone, and the conclusion is cutting his leg off cured his cold. While in fact the cold went and had nothing to do with his leg being cut off.

It is also like a take my granddad told me. A chap took his car to my uncle for a service. A month later, he got a puncture. He concluded it was my uncles fault as he must not have serviced the car correctly.

The point I am making is that, if this virus slows down, people may say, this is because of the lock-down/police-state, while without any evidence, it may be no more than a coincidence. Indeed it is possible that the lock-down/police-state has had no effect, or indeed made things far worse.

However, what no one seems to yet be talking about is, even if we see no more cases of Coronavirus in the UK, does this even matter, as as long as it is in one part of the world, it may come back again, and so do we stay in a permanent state of lock-down/police-state, until every single country world wide is 100% free of the Coronavirus?