Long term social distancing: Impact on public life & public transport?

[nlogax]

People keep saying the peak was 8th April but the graphs don't seem to bear that out, they seem to bear it out as being Easter weekend. Have you come across any actual evidence of it being 8th April?

Certainly looks like the peak for deaths in England, at least. What the below graph demonstrates is actual date of death as opposed to the daily DHSC stats presented by Hancock & co which can include a period of days of catch-up from various NHS regions.

COVID-19: Death Data in England – Update 24th April | The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine

www.cebm.net

Summary

Consistent with previous analyses, the peak day of deaths was the 8th of April. The structure of the data is similar across the regions, with the peak in London on the 4th of April, four days ahead of the rest of the country, the 8th of April.

 

[Huntergreed]

Ah, looking at this:

UKHSA data dashboard

Showing public health data across England

coronavirus.data.gov.uk

it actually appears to be 7th by specimen date. Most graphs in use are by test date which is a few days later.

If that is the case, then we may return to a state similar to the week before lockdown, bars and restaurants closed, Major gatherings off, but travel not too restricted, and this combined with the threat of another lockdown will hopefully ensure high compliance.

 

[scotrail158713]

When did lockdown start?

23rd March

 

[Bletchleyite]

23rd March

Thanks. Deaths are lagged 3-5 weeks - that would suggest we are only just seeing these now.

 

[Domh245]

Hospital deaths peak looks increasingly like it was the 8th, but the actual peak (including ONS figures) does seem to be a bit later (and potentially subject to change next week following the next lot of ONS data)

 

[cactustwirly]

The virus is probably going to circulate in some form for rather more than 18 months. It's very rare to be able to wipe one out entirely even with a vaccine. Flu is very much still going, for instance.

Flu and Coronavirus are completely different though.
If there is an effective virus relatively quickly, and the majority of the population is immunised, then I believe it could be stopped.
There is also research into effective anti-viral medications as well, which would also significantly reduce the lethality of the virus.

 

[nedchester]

I think that this thread is in many ways an irrelevance.

Those societies in East Asia that have shown us the way in terms of the efficacy of "track and trace", as well as closing off travel from virus generators at the earliest opportunity, are all using public transport. They wear masks and public transport doesn't seem to be a particularly notable source of community transmission.

I'd agree with that view. Public Transport use needs to go back to normal as much as possible with perhaps the use of masks. Reduce the risk but not completely eliminating it......

 

[Huntergreed]

I'd agree with that view. Public Transport use needs to go back to normal as much as possible with perhaps the use of masks. Reduce the risk but not completely eliminating it......

I would certainly hope that, with the WFH message still being enforced, the use of transport will increase significantly and, with masks perhaps being made compulsory, this would be safe to restore to levels not quite the same as but somewhat comparable to before. Having looked at the Scottish Government document which outlines the capacity being reduced to 10-25% of the normal total, it looks like this will not be the approach taken in Scotland at the very least, where I can imagine restrictions will remain for quite some time for 'essential travel only'.

I've noticed throughout this situation, Scotland seems to almost want to take it's own path, whilst Wales have admitted they are hopeful they can remove some restrictions on May 7, Sturgeon has explicitly said that she does not envisage any changes happening for a considerable period of time and she said, if necessary, she wouldn't hesitate to maintain restrictions north of the border if she felt they were lifted early by Westminster.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

That just won't work, people simply won't wear it, especially if there's leisure use taking place. What happens if a train is cancelled or taken out of service for whatever reason?

I can really see trains being a problem. This week I've been working at a slightly different time to normal, which combined with some early-morning engineering work on my route means I've been going in on a train which I wouldn't normally use (which in fact wouldn't exist in the normal timetable, although a similar service would). The normal timetable service I speak of would I believe be a 12-car class 700, GTR in their infinite wisdom are currently running an 8-car 2x387. To be fair this is adequate, but there isn't much scope for it to be much busier than it is now (I'd say about 10 people per carriage by the last stop before London) before distancing will break down.

Furthermore, there's people doing unhelpful things like sticking themselves in an aisle seat right in the middle thus taking up more "distancing space" than they need to, or sitting opposite someone else so they can use a plug socket, plus the usual few who just have to walk to the front before arrival at the terminus and then crowd around the front doorways. It would only take one infected person to cough a few times and it's easy to see how a whole batch of people are liable to become infected. On that score I suspect use of masks may have to be made compulsory just to give some extra protection, as I don't think distancing alone is going to prove workable.

As regards booking, how are you going to physically prevent people boarding a service they're not booked on?

I agree; one of the main benefits of having a season ticket is the flexibility to travel at whatever time I like, depending on my workload and what I plan to do after work. As a key worker I'm still commuting but with the nice weather over the past couple of weeks, rather than going straight home I've been going for a walk after work for a couple of hours then getting a later train home around 7 or 8pm. The idea of having to make an advance booking to travel on a commuter train for under an hour is impractical and unworkable; even if you did have counted places, train guards aren't doing inspections at the moment so how would it be policed?

Travelling through Leeds this morning I noticed Northern's coronavirus advice posters say "maintain social distancing where possible", not "maintain social distancing at all times". Once leisure travel is officially permitted again people will simply have to accept that there may be times on busy trains where you can't keep 1 or 2 metres away from the nearest person. If that bothers you, simply don't travel!

 

[nedchester]

Travelling through Leeds this morning I noticed Northern's coronavirus advice posters say "maintain social distancing where possible", not "maintain social distancing at all times". Once leisure travel is officially permitted again people will simply have to accept that there may be times on busy trains where you can't keep 1 or 2 metres away from the nearest person. If that bothers you, simply don't travel!

Exactly. Travel at your own risk but remember we cannot live in a risk free bubble forever.

 

[yorkie]

Exactly. Travel at your own risk but remember we cannot live in a risk free bubble forever.

I agree, though some people appear to want us to!

 

[bramling]

I agree, though some people appear to want us to!

Depends on one's perception of risk though. The difficulty with transport is you are disproportionately at the whim of others, making it difficult to have full control over one's exposure to risk.

In other words, you can take all the precautions in the world, then someone can come and sit opposite you and sneeze C19 directly into your face. For me this is why transport is more of an issue.

Yes the response may well be "go by car if you're not happy with that", but if everyone did that then things won't work. So we're left with using transport and taking some degree of risk, which could mean the infection rate starts climbing again. With places like pubs and mass gatherings closed, public transport must surely rate as one of the biggest risks for spreading.

 

[yorkie]

With places like pubs and mass gatherings closed, public transport must surely rate as one of the biggest risks for spreading.

Which is likely to lead to a lot of people choosing not to use it; probably disproportionately so, which is a good thing from the point of view of allowing social distancing for those of us who do need to use it.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes the response may well be "go by car if you're not happy with that", but if everyone did that then things won't work. So we're left with using transport and taking some degree of risk, which could mean the infection rate starts climbing again. With places like pubs and mass gatherings closed, public transport must surely rate as one of the biggest risks for spreading.

Is that true though.

I would rather see some evaluation of how other countries have successfully approached the issue before arbitrarily deciding what "must" be a big risk.

 

[bramling]

Is that true though.

I would rather see some evaluation of how other countries have successfully approached the issue before arbitrarily deciding what "must" be a big risk.

If we’re working on the basis that coughs and sneezes are the primary mechanism of spread (which is what we’ve heard from the scientists more or less since day one) then it follows that crowded public transport must be a comparatively risky activity.

As I’ve said before, I’d possibly be happy to take an element of risk for myself as I’m not (knowingly) part of a high-risk group. However I have some concern about passing it on to others who are bordering on being higher risk due to age, hence I’m more risk-aware than I might otherwise be. I don’t wish to be exposed to the uncontrollable risk of someone coughing over me in a confined space. Masks might help but then again we’ve heard for so long how ineffective they are...

 

[Killingworth]

If we’re working on the basis that coughs and sneezes are the primary mechanism of spread (which is what we’ve heard from the scientists more or less since day one) then it follows that crowded public transport must be a comparatively risky activity.

As I’ve said before, I’d possibly be happy to take an element of risk for myself as I’m not (knowingly) part of a high-risk group. However I have some concern about passing it on to others who are bordering on being higher risk due to age, hence I’m more risk-aware than I might otherwise be. I don’t wish to be exposed to the uncontrollable risk of someone coughing over me in a confined space. Masks might help but then again we’ve heard for so long how ineffective they are...

Although your handkerchief is no longer considered safe. In a paper handkerchief dropped as litter seems to be the done thing by many these days!

 

[greyman42]

Exactly. Travel at your own risk but remember we cannot live in a risk free bubble forever.

As Yorkie said, some people seem to want to. I suppose if you are sat at home happy on 80% of your wage, don't have much of a social life and are a bit of a couch potato, then this lockdown will have its appeal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As Yorkie said, some people seem to want to. I suppose if you are sat at home happy on 80% of your wage, don't have much of a social life and are a bit of a couch potato, then this lockdown will have its appeal.

To some it's a free holiday, albeit a "staycation", and I posit that it's mostly those who are shouting for it to continue much longer.

 

[Mag_seven]

I appreciate that it is a related issue but can we keep all discussion about the wearing of facemasks and face coverings to the appropriate thread:

Cloth masks, scarves and bandanas to be 'encouraged' with no compulsion

It appears highly likely that the British Government will finally change its advice in the next few days on public mask-wearing, following new recommendations from its scientific advisors. Cloth masks, scarves, and bandanas covering the mouth would be 'encouraged' in public but there will be no...

www.railforums.co.uk

thanks

 

[HH]

To some it's a free holiday, albeit a "staycation", and I posit that it's mostly those who are shouting for it to continue much longer.

I posit that it's people who are scared of the virus, possibly for others, rather than themselves.

I posit that those who are crying for restrictions to be removed are doing it so that they can go down the pub, or train spot, or sell drugs.

Not really, but just showing how biased the previous post was.

 

[david1212]

I would certainly hope that, with the WFH message still being enforced, the use of transport will increase significantly and, with masks perhaps being made compulsory, this would be safe to restore to levels not quite the same as but somewhat comparable to before. Having looked at the Scottish Government document which outlines the capacity being reduced to 10-25% of the normal total, it looks like this will not be the approach taken in Scotland at the very least, where I can imagine restrictions will remain for quite some time for 'essential travel only'.

I've noticed throughout this situation, Scotland seems to almost want to take it's own path, whilst Wales have admitted they are hopeful they can remove some restrictions on May 7, Sturgeon has explicitly said that she does not envisage any changes happening for a considerable period of time and she said, if necessary, she wouldn't hesitate to maintain restrictions north of the border if she felt they were lifted early by Westminster.

That depends on the route you travelling and what pre Covid-19 were the normal loadings. I note you give your location as Dumfries so while short trains too very different from urban areas and routes where even off-peak trains are regularly over capacity. The ideal scenario once the government relax non-essential travel restrictions is sufficient demand for a normal weekday or at least Saturday service to be viable but for each group to not have to share facing seats with any others and individuals travelling alone to not have to share a pair of airline seats plus across the aisle only one aisle seat occupied. This of course is not 2m distancing but at least front and rear separation by a headrest and sideways by the aisle plus a seat.

 

[yorksrob]

The BEEB this morning is announcing that in a recent survey, just over 60% of people would currently be fearful of using public transport.

I wonder how closely that follows the roughly half the population who, we're told, don't tend to use the railway anyway.

 

[HH]

The BEEB this morning is announcing that in a recent survey, just over 60% of people would currently be fearful of using public transport.

I wonder how closely that follows the roughly half the population who, we're told, don't tend to use the railway anyway.

That is just supposition. I would think that in London, where almost everyone uses public transport, many people would be reluctant to use it at the moment.

 

[yorksrob]

That is just supposition. I would think that in London, where almost everyone uses public transport, many people would be reluctant to use it at the moment.

It's a survey of some sort, which suggests it will have been based on survey evidence, so a lot stronger than supposition (albeit with its own caveats).

Also I presume it's nationwide, so won't be solely London based.

 

[HH]

It's a survey of some sort, which suggests it will have been based on survey evidence, so a lot stronger than supposition (albeit with its own caveats).

Also I presume it's nationwide, so won't be solely London based.

Sorry, I meant your supposition that there may be a correlation between the survey 60% and those that don't normally use public transport. The survey will be as accurate as surveys normally are.

 

[yorksrob]

Sorry, I meant your supposition that there may be a correlation between the survey 60% and those that don't normally use public transport. The survey will be as accurate as surveys normally are.

Well, in that case, I agree - pure conjecture (supposition is too strong a word) on my part. I know my elderly parents, for example, will be swerving public transport for the forseeable, whereas they were previously regular users.

That said, it wouldn't surprise me if those disinclined towards public transport in the first place are more likely to be put off.

 

[HH]

Well, in that case, I agree - pure conjecture (supposition is too strong a word) on my part. I know my elderly parents, for example, will be swerving public transport for the forseeable, whereas they were previously regular users.

That said, it wouldn't surprise me if those disinclined towards public transport in the first place are more likely to be put off.

The conclusion must be that it's a poor survey, because they should have split it between frequent users, occasional users and non-users. If you are right we would expect to see an increasing number of fearful people as normal usage drops. I have to wonder what steps they took to normalise the sample, so it was representative of the three groups, as well as age, sex, etc., all of which I would think would affect the outcome.

 

[yorksrob]

The conclusion must be that it's a poor survey, because they should have split it between frequent users, occasional users and non-users. If you are right we would expect to see an increasing number of fearful people as normal usage drops. I have to wonder what steps they took to normalise the sample, so it was representative of the three groups, as well as age, sex, etc., all of which I would think would affect the outcome.

Well, it also mentioned things such as visiting restaurants and pubs, so it doesn't appear to have been solely focussed on transport.

However, I recall that the commuting survey a couple of weeks ago suggested reductions of about a quarter, so it appears very much to be the case that whilst there will be a reduction in public transport usage, trains and buses won't be carting around fresh air.

 

[baz962]

Well, it also mentioned things such as visiting restaurants and pubs, so it doesn't appear to have been solely focussed on transport.

However, I recall that the commuting survey a couple of weeks ago suggested reductions of about a quarter, so it appears very much to be the case that whilst there will be a reduction in public transport usage, trains and buses won't be carting around fresh air.

I can definitely tell you that some train's are v quiet and some are quite busy still. I reckon it depends on the toc too. Commuting into work , I have quite often shared eight and twelve car train's with a few people and had whole coaches to myself. Driven and passed on some busy one's , once in London.

 

[HH]

I can definitely tell you that some train's are v quiet and some are quite busy still. I reckon it depends on the toc too. Commuting into work , I have quite often shared eight and twelve car train's with a few people and had whole coaches to myself. Driven and passed on some busy one's , once in London.

Thanks. This is what I'd expect, that it does depend very much on the location and service, i.e. who is using that train and for what purpose.

Have you noticed any age/sex/ethnic changes from the normal mix?