Should the 2m rule be relaxed ?

[Spartacus]

There's a lot of pressure being applied to relax the 2m rule at the moment, mainly by businesses (hospitality, airlines ..) as they see it as a barrier to getting enough customers in to justify opening.

On the other hand infection rates are higher here then other countries that have been cited as relaxing the rule.

My personal thought is after seeing what happened when things were relaxed recently (increased numbers on the beaches , mass protests , failure to social distance) that if the rule is relaxed to 1m then that would soon be ignored as currently most people are not observing the full 2m rule when passing others in the street.

Thoughts ?

[Penguin68]

ignored as currently most people are not observing the full 2m rule when passing others in the street.

The 'two metre rule' really refers to continuous contact, indoors, lasting 15 minutes or more. Which is what bars and schools and offices etc. would be offering. Transmission in the open is less likely (far less likely) and people passing (no continuity of contact) within 1 metre is almost certainly virtually risk free. A queue for a shop, even in the open, offers 'continuous' contact possibilities - if the queue is long, which is why 2 metres, for queues, probably meets the precautionary principle. Someone walking through (or past) the queue at a metre distance probably doesn't.

[Spartacus]

Is that a vote in support of keeping the 2m rule or not ?

[edcam]

Social distancing has all but gone out the window post-Cummings. Other countries have successfully got on top of the virus with 1m. I read an article saying that in Italy people were generally exceeding the 1m rule. Says a lot about how poorly our government handled the lockdown measures and the entitled psyche in the UK (specifically England.)

[Nigello]

Social distancing has all but gone out the window post-Cummings.

Maybe it has, but individuals are not being forced by Cummings or any other power to break social distancing. There is no gun at their head. They have simply made a decision - themselves with no compulsion from anyone else.

It is only the individual who is doing the deciding, nobody else.

I will be keeping as far away as possible from crowds and won?t be going to any eatery, pub, etc. even if it is outside only. I don?t NEED to go to those places, though it could well be I would LIKE or WANT to. I don?t want to get ill so I do my utmost to stay well. It?s really up to you, even though you are getting conflicting and even hypocritical examples from others. So what if X has done Y?

[KidKruger]

I think it's important to assess how much confidence you have in the Govt and their advice.

If you faithfully believe everything you are advised, all should be OK, right ?

If you have doubts then make your own decisions and avoid places you think are unsafe.

But no, IMO 2m should not be relaxed. I don't agree with increasing risk to health for business (and backbencher protesting) reasons !

[first mate]

Last night Sir Patrick Vallance referred to this and said it is about balance of risks. There is no scientific absolute rule, as KK says, it depends on context, indoors/outdoors, mask/no mask, physical contact/people or surfaces/ length of time of proximity to other people/ finally absolute risk- is there an infected person close to you.

Problem is we don't know who is infected and who isn't and people who are super spreaders may not be aware themselves. so, until we know more about the virus, I'd go for being super cautious but this has to be balanced against harm to the economy and people being able to earn money and live.

No easy answer. However, I would add that if the council is blocking off streets to facilitate social distancing (however dubious) then people should stick to a SD 'rule' or else what is the point?

[malumbu]

Cummings behaviour is relevant. Progressively more were ignoring lock down but he has accelerated things. How significant I don't know. We will be in this daft situation where we will not be allowed to do some things (mass entertainment), compulsive social distancing (office, galleries and the like), partial (shops, public transport) and no social distancing (for many, both in public and in private). I believe that the government has managed this so badly.

[Spartacus]

I wonder if other counties support their governments decisions ? Italy are holding their government to account and let's be honest it's a global pandemic and if we had a different government in place they would make mistakes too.

One person breaking the rules doesn't justify you doing the same, if Cummings or any other rule breaker jumped off a cliff would you?

The real issue is that the science here is new and our scientists support keeping the 2m rule but activists want 1m and regardless of what the government decide they will be wrong in the eyes of half the population so it's a no win decision.

Are we that desperate for a pint and pizza that we would risk our health or is the risk of a second wave exaggerated ?

[Earl Aelfheah]

I am genuinely worried about how quickly we now seem to be moving to 'unlock'. If we relax the 2 m rule (which is largely being ignored already), then social distancing will effectively be over.

I was listening to the medical / scientific adviser to the NZ government on the radio and his advice was, strict lock down, coupled with effective track and trace and quarantine for those entering the country for 6-8 weeks (I think - might have the time frame slightly wrong) and we could in his opinion, eradicate the virus. The half measures, partial tracing, kinda lockdown etc. is all a recipe for a second wave. Of course, this is what we ought to have been doing from the beginning, but we are where we are now.

I understand that we need to get things moving again, but the oft cited 'public health vs economic damage' narrative represents a totally false dichotomy imo. A second wave will cause a much deeper and longer recession.

[SpringTime]

Just been discussing this issue with colleagues indoors. The 2m rule is hard enough for adults let alone children. If it's reduced then it's really from 2m to zero. The risk only begins to decline at 2m+ so reducing may as well mean not having it at all. 1m, 1.5m or even 1.75m aren't effective.

None of this really worries me but I wholly respect and will support others' means of protecting themselves.

We'll probably ride it out through summer without too many virus worries and then see what happens in winter when more people start sneezing again... with their lovely coughs, colds and SARS-CoV-2.

[malumbu]

Cummings didn't jump off a cliff. He did something that benefited him. Some will see this as a signal to do similar. Or a justification. Or whatever, consciously or unconsciously. Whether that is .2 % 2% or 20% I cannot tell.

Hearing someone today say "things are returning to normal". No they aren't. They that added that there is less anxiety on the streets. Yes there is. How much of this is the media long since tiring of showing some of the real impacts ie people struggling for life, medics and other responders in difficult circumstances, or a general feeling from the government's messages, I don't know. Another 1000 to 2000 will die over this week. There is of course positives on the decline of the number of infections. It just doesn't seem the right time to celebrate, not quite yet. And to drop our guard.

[NewWave]

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Social distancing has all but gone out the window

> post-Cummings. Other countries have successfully

> got on top of the virus with 1m. I read an

> article saying that in Italy people were generally

> exceeding the 1m rule. Says a lot about how

> poorly our government handled the lockdown

> measures and the entitled psyche in the UK

> (specifically England.)

I'm strongly against reducing the 2m rule.

I'm working in central london and duce to the complacency of many (ie; man got on jubilee line today and removed his mask saying he was too hot) I'm convinced there will be a 2nd wave.

people are becoming complacent-the 2m rule is not a rule as there is nobody to enforce it so we rely on peoples common sense.

the 2m rule needs to stay because until they find a vaccine we are all in danger.

As a country with the 2nd highest death toll in the world (beaten only by the vast USA) now is not the time to relax rules.

This government went into lockdown 2 weeks later than they should have.

And they are relaxing the rules too soon.

When Dominic Cummings broke the rules and didn't resign or get fired this whole so called lockdown became a farce.

I have several close friends who live in france and Italy and we did NOT have a lockdown like they had.

Its a mess.

[uncleglen]

this WHOLE thread was started weeks before the Dominic Cummings event...what is wrong with you people!

https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,2105608

[Blah Blah]

Distancing will always be dependent on other factors. If you are in an enclosed space where people are coughing or sneezing, it doesn't really matter how far you stand from others. Viral particles will hang about in the sir you breath. Outside however is a different matter. People have to consider where they are and use common sense.

This is also why the challenge to reopen bars, restaurants, clubs, cinemas, theatre, concert venues, stadiums etc is so big, followed by gyms,hairdressers etc. There is no easy answer to that. These are the spaces where viruses are most easily transmitted.

[fishbiscuits]

My thoughts are that 2m was never really practical, and in my experience, almost nobody shows a willingness to stick to it anyway.

Even out in the open, almost nobody shows any spatial awareness - I usually step into the road to give other pedestrians space, while the other person ambles on down the middle of the pavement completely oblivious to social distancing, staring at their phone, or holding hands and chatting with their partner. Drivers - instead of slowing while I give other pedestrians space - often prefer to beep (or even wind their windows down and shout).

You think you're keeping 2m away from other shoppers in the supermarkets? You're kidding yourself.

Look what happened when pubs, coffee shops, ice cream parlours starting relaxing and opening up for takeaway business. People queueing down the street, barely 1m from each other. Let alone 2. Can you imagine what will happen when pubs actually re-open properly?

As for key workers using public transport every day. They're lucky if they can avoid body contact!!

Anti-racism protests going on around the country. A cause which I agree with unequivocally. But also a stark message that social distancing and stopping the spread of covid is no longer #1 priority for many people.

Wearing face coverings in enclosed spaces, and washing/sanitising your hands regularly is much more important. 2m distancing was always a farce.

[Spartacus]

With the comments on indoor vs outdoor spread of droplets and whilst shops can reopen safely with the 2m rule and limit numbers inside with people queuing outside where it is relatively safer ( ? ) I have to ask the following question.

How safe is an enclosed shopping center like Westfield's where the droplets and potential spread of infection won't respond in the same way as they would in an open high street ?

[Blah Blah]

In short, not as safe if the infection rate starts to rise again. Why? Because enclosed shopping centers have internal furniture, like benches, escalators, lifts, stairways. All of those are ample opportunity for people to pick up the virus from others.