Is it time to relax the 2m social distancing guideline? (WHO guidance is 1m)

[Scrotnig]

Those who vote against it are quite possibly isolating anyway or don't understand the importance of the economy and livelihoods.

The latter part of this is key.

There are far too many people (not specifically here, just in general) who take the "lives before economy" stance. These people generally seem to believe that everything can be put on hold indefinitely, and when questioned about how society might be funded in the meantime, they tend to say "the government can pay".

This fundamental misunderstanding of how society works, prevalent among such seemingly large numbers of people, is deeply concerning.

 

[Bikeman78]

I think Shapps said this morning that 4th July is the earliest it will be reduced. Although that said, u-turns aren't exactly unheard of in this government so we can still hope. I'm in complete agreement with you though, we really need to reduce it now if we have any hope of saving the economy. I do think more people are starting to realise this after having tried to go shopping yesterday and keep 2 metres apart at all times, and realising it's incredibly impractical.

This link gives a few examples of this.

Queues and social distancing as shops reopen in England

Non-essential retailers open their doors with strict safety measures.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[duncanp]

This article from Sky News today is significant

Coronavirus: Minister tells businesses to 'standby' for decision on cutting two-metre distancing rule

"This won't be a long process," the transport secretary promises - after claims 3.5 million jobs depend on the change.

news.sky.com

It sounds as if the decision to relax the rule could come within days, even if it does not take effect until July 4th.

Businesses have been told to "standby" for a decision on whether the two-metre social distancing rule will be eased.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps promised businesses the government review on halving how far apart people should stay to avoid spreading coronavirus will not be a "long process".


He admitted there is "pressure" to relax the guidance, given the World Health Organisation says it should be "at least one metre" and some Conservative MPs claim 3.5 million jobs are at risk if the restrictions aren't eased.

Image:More shops will be allowed to reopen if they can do so safely from 4 July
"This won't be a long process but it's important to get it right," Mr Shapps told Sky News' Kay Burley@Breakfast.

"As everybody knows there is lots of different evidence coming in from around the world where different countries are using different amounts of space.


Advertisement

Shapps: 'We've wrapped our arms around families'
"We must not go back to the virus spreading virulently within society."


Britons have been told since COVID-19 cases surged in March to maintain social distancing when around others from outside their own household.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

This article from Sky News today is significant

Coronavirus: Minister tells businesses to 'standby' for decision on cutting two-metre distancing rule

"This won't be a long process," the transport secretary promises - after claims 3.5 million jobs depend on the change.

news.sky.com

It sounds as if the decision to relax the rule could come within days, even if it does not take effect until July 4th.

It needs to come within days too. Any pub or restaurant due to reopen in advance on 4th July needs at least a couple of weeks' notice so they know how many screens, signs and separators to order.

 

[Skymonster]

Things are getting critical now. It has to be relaxed from the end of this month at the very latest.

The consequences will be dire if this is not done.

Quotes from BBC:

Last week, the ONS revealed the UK economy shrank by a 20.4% in April - the largest monthly contraction on record - as the country spent its first full month in lockdown.

And that was only the first full month...

Lockdown is 'economic catastrophe', says William Hague

The former Conservative leader says lockdown is increasing inequality, social tension and debt.

www.bbc.co.uk

Ex-Tory Leader William Hague says lockdown is an "economic catastrophe" and is calling for the two-metre distancing rule to be scrapped. Writing in Telegraph, Lord Hague said lockdown was increasing inequality, social tension and debt...It comes as official figures suggest the number of workers on UK payrolls dived more than 600,000 between March and May - reflecting the impact of about six weeks in lockdown. But economists say the full impact on employment will not be felt until wage support schemes end in October.

Oh, how I was torn apart on this forum twelve weeks ago for saying the following...

Twelve weeks, let alone more, is likely to represent a disaster of epic proportions. It could lead to social deprivation, untold misery for millions, civil unrest and a substantial increase in suicides.

And yet, here is another quote from the BBC article linked to above:

And Transport Secretary Grant Shapps has said the government would not amend the [2m social distancing] restriction until 4 July at the earliest.

I really cannot understand why the Government is being so pg-headed about this. It is a relatively easy thing to do, the science doesn't support 2m, and if its done across the board and allied with easing up on the hospitality industries it could go some way to easing the huge mess the Government has created.

 

[Skymonster]

These people generally seem to believe that everything can be put on hold indefinitely, and when questioned about how society might be funded in the meantime, they tend to say "the government can pay". This fundamental misunderstanding of how society works, prevalent among such seemingly large numbers of people, is deeply concerning.

What really worries me is that the government itself doesn't seem to understand this either.

 

[Bantamzen]

I really cannot understand why the Government is being so pg-headed about this. It is a relatively easy thing to do, the science doesn't support 2m, and if its done across the board and allied with easing up on the hospitality industries it could go some way to easing the huge mess the Government has created.

Its probably all political posturing, start out by playing the science card. Then as pressure builds, they can pretend to be listening by loosening the restrictions at a whim as they wish.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Its probably all political posturing, start out by playing the science card. Then as pressure builds, they can pretend to be listening by loosening the restrictions at a whim as they wish.

I'd say on the contrary - it's about the biggest controversy of the whole episode.

It is true that:
1. 2m distancing considerably reduces spread
2. The hospitality industry (other than hotels with no service) cannot reopen with it in place

This is a proper dilemma with R as close to 1 as it is. We must surely have on the table:

3. Open beer gardens, but also provide stronger financial assistance to the pub and restaurant trade, basically to fully replace lost profits, so they can remain closed, other than outdoors service with 2m distancing, for much, much longer but still be in a position to reopen later. This would be less about furlough (as we could help those people into other jobs) but more about ensuring that the limited company can effectively be laid dormant barring basic building maintenance for some time, but still be in a position to restart with a month or two's notice.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I'd say on the contrary - it's about the biggest controversy of the whole episode.

It is true that:
1. 2m distancing considerably reduces spread
2. The hospitality industry (other than hotels with no service) cannot reopen with it in place

This is a proper dilemma with R as close to 1 as it is. We must surely have on the table:

3. Open beer gardens, but also provide stronger financial assistance to the pub and restaurant trade, basically to fully replace lost profits, so they can remain closed, other than outdoors service with 2m distancing, for much, much longer but still be in a position to reopen later. This would be less about furlough (as we could help those people into other jobs) but more about ensuring that the limited company can effectively be laid dormant barring basic building maintenance for some time, but still be in a position to restart with a month or two's notice.

There's no dilemma at all. Your claim that "2m distancing considerably reduces spread" is disputed by most scientists and, even if it were true, the chances of anyone catching the virus by being within 2 metres of you are minimal. For example, an increase of catching the virus from 0.001% to 0.002% might technically be classed as a "considerable" increase but nevertheless the risk remains tiny.

I share the majority view on here that the government is dithering on a decision that needs to be made NOW. You don't need to commission a report to tell you what you already know!

 

[Bantamzen]

I'd say on the contrary - it's about the biggest controversy of the whole episode.

It is true that:
1. 2m distancing considerably reduces spread

Well the science seems to be unsure if 2m was necessary or massively more effective. 2 metres might reduce the risks a bit more, but then so would 3, 4 or 5 metres. However the greater the distance the greater the impact on other issues such as the economy, social cohesion & even mental wellbeing.

​

2. The hospitality industry (other than hotels with no service) cannot reopen with it in place

Agreed, the decision to reduce / withdraw needs to be made as a matter of urgency if the trade isn't going to be decimated, and hundreds of thousands more tipped into unemployment.

​

This is a proper dilemma with R as close to 1 as it is. We must surely have on the table:

R is one measurement, and even an increasing number doesn't necessarily signal a crisis as has been discussed on other threads.

​

3. Open beer gardens, but also provide stronger financial assistance to the pub and restaurant trade, basically to fully replace lost profits, so they can remain closed, other than outdoors service with 2m distancing, for much, much longer but still be in a position to reopen later. This would be less about furlough (as we could help those people into other jobs) but more about ensuring that the limited company can effectively be laid dormant barring basic building maintenance for some time, but still be in a position to restart with a month or two's notice.

Frankly I don't think further assistance / furloughing is going to be an option for much longer. It isn't just the venues themselves falling into trouble, its the supply chain too. France has already shown that a return to indoors hospitality is doable without crippling capacity, so we will just have to follow suit.

 

[Skymonster]

It is true that:
1. 2m distancing considerably reduces spread

No it isn't true. Some scientists are sticking to the theory that 2m reduces the RISK of it being transmitted but I've seen no data pointing to countries adopting 1.5m or 1m having higher spread rates than the UK does. Likewise, 3m would reduce the RISK further. Where do we stop?

Come on then if you believe 2m considerably reduces spread: which countries that had 1m have subsequently increased it to 2m to contain increasing spread?

 

[Skymonster]

France has already shown that a return to indoors hospitality is doable without crippling capacity, so we will just have to follow suit.

We were said to be two to three weeks behind France. So if this government does not open things up by the end of this month (three weeks after Italy and France) then I will truly believe our politicians are being reckless with the economy and people's livelihoods.

 

[Huntergreed]

We were said to be two to three weeks behind France. So if this government does not open things up by the end of this month (three weeks after Italy and France) then I will truly believe our politicians are being reckless with the economy and people's livelihoods.

This seems to already be the case in Scotland. Where they are only starting to reopen everything in around a month from now, and god knows when they’ll fully reopen everything.

Our R number is 0.52, we’ve had 0 cases in 2 weeks in this region, no deaths, yet we’re on a stricter lockdown than England for no apparent reason, totally trashing our economy and many livelihoods (so many independent shops, cafes etc have closed down for good). It seems they just don’t care about anything at all unless it’s “Covid19”.

Lost your job and can’t make any money? Tough

Got a different disease or condition?
Tough.

Got a new cough?
Oh my goodness lock us down for another month.

We (the nation and governments) need to start being more measured, mature and rational in our response.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No it isn't true. Some scientists are sticking to the theory that 2m reduces the RISK of it being transmitted but I've seen no data pointing to countries adopting 1.5m or 1m having higher spread rates than the UK does. Likewise, 3m would reduce the RISK further. Where do we stop?

Come on then if you believe 2m considerably reduces spread: which countries that had 1m have subsequently increased it to 2m to contain increasing spread?

It's too early for that. As we move towards a second wave (which will happen) we will see.

 

[Bantamzen]

We were said to be two to three weeks behind France. So if this government does not open things up by the end of this month (three weeks after Italy and France) then I will truly believe our politicians are being reckless with the economy and people's livelihoods.

I suspect that they will bow to the growing pressure, but they have also been hinting at various caveats to make 1 metre possible. So don't be surprised if their future guidance will advise walls of Perspex everywhere and hazmat suits for bar staff..

 

[_toommm_]

Interestingly I’ve just had a survey from Transport Focus, and one of the multi-choice questions was ‘To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about social distancing on public transport?’ with the statement being ‘Reducing social distancing on public transport from 2 metres to 1 metre is a good idea.’

 

[Skymonster]

It's too early for that. As we move towards a second wave (which will happen) we will see.

So there are no countries that have gone from 1m to 2m to contain spread. Great - I'm glad that is settled. If - its IF, not WHEN - a second wave starts to come then appropriate steps will need to be taken, and that might mean changing things again. In the mean time, we need to operate that in every country that has adopted 1m, 1m is working as well as 2m, but 1m has the added advantage of helping the economy. Its all about having the appropriate response for the circumstances, and right now 2m isn't it.

 

[Skymonster]

I suspect that they will bow to the growing pressure, but they have also been hinting at various caveats to make 1 metre possible. So don't be surprised if their future guidance will advise walls of Perspex everywhere and hazmat suits for bar staff..

It really is nonsense isn't it. France is managing to open cafes and bars so I really cannot understand why it is not possible here. France is even (horror of horrors) filling up trains. And yet our Government continues to bury its head in the sand and put its own interests - its need to be seen to be doing something - ahead of the country's population. When all this is over, Boris will be long-gone because he'll lose the next election on either his response to the virus or the wrecked economy. So he doesn't care as long as he looks good now, and can afford to ignore the long term havoc he's creating.

 

[Jamesrob637]

It needs to come within days too. Any pub or restaurant due to reopen in advance on 4th July needs at least a couple of weeks' notice so they know how many screens, signs and separators to order.

They won't all reopen on the 4th as that's a Saturday. Can you imagine the chaos ensued opening everything on a Saturday? At least retail reopened on a Monday. That was bad enough!

I think pubs will slowly reopen from Monday the 6th of July.

 

[thejuggler]

It really is nonsense isn't it. France is managing to open cafes and bars so I really cannot understand why it is not possible here. France is even (horror of horrors) filling up trains. And yet our Government continues to bury its head in the sand and put its own interests - its need to be seen to be doing something - ahead of the country's population. When all this is over, Boris will be long-gone because he'll lose the next election on either his response to the virus or the wrecked economy. So he doesn't care as long as he looks good now, and can afford to ignore the long term havoc he's creating.

It simply goes back to not having a strategy with measurable targets which provide the points at which decisions are made.

It was admitted yesterday that the pandemic war gaming from 2016 did not consider economic impacts and all Government's economic decisions, furlough, business grants etc have been made on the hoof.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

They won't all reopen on the 4th as that's a Saturday. Can you imagine the chaos ensued opening everything on a Saturday? At least retail reopened on a Monday. That was bad enough!

I think pubs will slowly reopen from Monday the 6th of July.

I agree that a "soft reopening" on a weekday would be sensible so pubs are able to gauge demand and practicality before they're engulfed by the weekend drinking crowd, but why not have that soft reopening on Monday 29 June instead of waiting yet another week?

I know the government has said they won't reopen before 4 July but then this government is no stranger to u-turns, is it?

 

[Jamesrob637]

I agree that a "soft reopening" on a weekday would be sensible so pubs are able to gauge demand and practicality beofre they're engulfed by the weekend drinking crowd, but why not have that soft reopening on Monday 29 June instead of waiting yet another week?

I know the government has said they won't reopen before 4 July but then this government is no stranger to u-turns, is it?

Some may be ready to reopen a fortnight yesterday but some others may need that extra week. Weekend opening should be left for a while, or only daytime Saturdays and Sundays for a while.

 

[Enthusiast]

"Coronavirus: Minister tells businesses to 'standby' for decision on cutting two-metre distancing rule"

Why do they keep referring to it as a "rule"?

 

[MikeWM]

"Coronavirus: Minister tells businesses to 'standby' for decision on cutting two-metre distancing rule"

Why do they keep referring to it as a "rule"?

Businesses have been standing by for months. I'm not sure they want to do a lot more of it.

After months of thought, they're going to say 'you can go to 1 metre, but only with face coverings' - or change it to 1.5m - or something equally silly, aren't they :-/

 

[Skymonster]

"Coronavirus: Minister tells businesses to 'standby' for decision on cutting two-metre distancing rule"

Why do they keep referring to it as a "rule"?

Because they are seeking compliance from the sheeple

 

[Huntergreed]

Businesses have been standing by for months. I'm not sure they want to do a lot more of it.

After months of thought, they're going to say 'you can go to 1 metre, but only with face coverings' - or change it to 1.5m - or something equally silly, aren't they :-/

I would hope they would say '1m' without any additional measures, but I fear it'll either be 1.5m, 1m with face coverings, or something even sillier like 1.25m or 1.75m, all of which is not good for helping the economy to reopen.

 

[AM9]

Things are getting critical now. It has to be relaxed from the end of this month at the very latest.

The consequences will be dire if this is not done.

Nearly 80% of forum members who voted in the poll agree that this guideline should either have already been relaxed already, or be relaxed at the end of this month.

Those who vote against it are quite possibly isolating anyway or don't understand the importance of the economy and livelihoods.

Not wishing to get involved in the debate at the moment, but in all honesty, I think you may be making a wrong assumption about the results of the poll. The options are four variations on the Government reducing the distance form its current 2m to something less and just one for the extreme opposite, i.e. retaining it indefinitely, (in other words until a vaccine is widely available or close to zero cases*). I suspect that quite a few members would see such a loaded set of options leading to very few who feel that the something between reducing it soon (without any relevant epidemial conditions being met) and an implied 'batten down the hatches forever' option at the bottom of the list. The fact is that the first four options do not acknowledge the possibility of a second peak.
* neither of those are likely to be in 2020, - indeed, the may not happen next year or the year after, - depending on an interpretation of zero cases.

 

[yorkie]

Not wishing to get involved in the debate at the moment, but in all honesty, I think you may be making a wrong assumption about the results of the poll. The options are four variations on the Government reducing the distance form its current 2m to something less and just one for the extreme opposite, i.e. retaining it indefinitely, (in other words until a vaccine is widely available or close to zero cases*). I suspect that quite a few members would see such a loaded set of options leading to very few who feel that the something between reducing it soon (without any relevant epidemial conditions being met) and an implied 'batten down the hatches forever' option at the bottom of the list. The fact is that the first four options do not acknowledge the possibility of a second peak.
* neither of those are likely to be in 2020, - indeed, the may not happen next year or the year after, - depending on an interpretation of zero cases.

Second peak or not, we cannot live like this any longer. Things have to change, urgently, and most people do recognise that.

Why do they keep referring to it as a "rule"?

Quite; Northern Rail use that term too (they would!); it's very grating.

 

[AM9]

Second peak or not, we cannot live like this any longer. Things have to change, urgently, and most people do recognise that. ...

So, you have't said on the subject of my post, so you I presume that you have nothing to say about the effectiveness of this thread's poll or the integrity of any conclusions anybody might draw from the voting figures.

 

[yorkie]

So, you have't said on the subject of my post, so you I presume that you have nothing to say about the effectiveness of this thread's poll or the integrity of any conclusions anybody might draw from the voting figures.

My point is that most people clearly realise that the 2m guideline needs to be abolished; the evidence for that can be seen everywhere and anywhere, not just here. If you wish to disagree, that's fine, but I'm glad most people realise the dangers of how dire the situation will be if this madness continues.