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

[johnnychips]

So the Government should ignore the people with experience of this type of situation and take the populist "what the people want" approach without regard for the health consequences. Yes, there are conseuquences for the economy (as there are throughout the world), but these are nothing compared with what is coming next January.
My view is that the Johnson and his cronies are claiming to follow the advice of the scientists, but when challenged u-turn and follow the press opinion.
(I think it was Heseltine who described Johnson as someone who dithers, see which way the crowd is going and says follow me).

I wouldn’t disagree with Hestletine’s assessment of Boris, but what is going to happen next January?

 

[Richard Scott]

I wouldn’t disagree with Hestletine’s assessment of Boris, but what is going to happen next January?

Brexit?

 

[yorksrob]

But remember, 1m isn't a "populist" position. It is a minimum (admittedly) but it is one quoted by the WHO, as well as the guideline for a number of countries.

 

[johnnychips]

Brexit?

Oh sorry, I assumed the poster meant there would be some sort of ‘second wave’ because it was winter, but I would have expected that in, say, October.

 

[yorkie]

So the Government should ignore the people with experience of this type of situation and take the populist "what the people want" approach without regard for the health consequences. Yes, there are conseuquences for the economy (as there are throughout the world), but these are nothing compared with what is coming next January.
My view is that the Johnson and his cronies are claiming to follow the advice of the scientists, but when challenged u-turn and follow the press opinion.
(I think it was Heseltine who described Johnson as someone who dithers, see which way the crowd is going and says follow me).

See my recent posts in this thread; there are plenty of scientists who agree that 2m isn't required.

Also, if 2m is so crucial, why don't WHO stipulate 2m?

As for what is coming next January, believe me if we keep 2m social distancing until then, the severe economic hardship would be so bad that this virus would be the least of our problems. That can't happen.

 

[45107]

See my recent posts in this thread; there are plenty of scientists who agree that 2m isn't required.

Also, if 2m is so crucial, why don't WHO stipulate 2m?

As for what is coming next January, believe me if we keep 2m social distancing until then, the severe economic hardship would be so bad that this virus would be the least of our problems. That can't happen.

I am of the view that the 2m needs to be reduced as life cannot continue as it is, maybe reduce it to 1m. However the number of daily fatalities and new infections are still high (in comparison to countries that have lifted restrictions and are reopening their economies/borders). Some form of restrictions (face masks ? / quarantine) need to remain until we are down to constant 2 figure (and occasionaly 1-10) fatatites and new infections in the low 3 figures.
This needs to be done with an effective track and trace system. I am not bothered if it is 'world beating' or not. I just want to see something that does what it says on the tin.

 

[Starmill]

Brexit?

I don't think so? But surely that's not a topic for this thread.

 

[corfield]

So the Government should ignore the people with experience of this type of situation and take the populist "what the people want" approach without regard for the health consequences. Yes, there are conseuquences for the economy (as there are throughout the world), but these are nothing compared with what is coming next January.
My view is that the Johnson and his cronies are claiming to follow the advice of the scientists, but when challenged u-turn and follow the press opinion.
(I think it was Heseltine who described Johnson as someone who dithers, see which way the crowd is going and says follow me).

Yes, because what “is” their experience?
I am an expert in several fields and what I know is just what that really means especially when it is something even slightly new or different.
Johnson et al (since it is far more than him) may well be a poor leader but the people are already ignoring the “rules”. Look around parks, town centres - people are increasingly treating this with contempt and the impact on jobs and lives is horrific. If he wants to even keep the pretence of beinhe needs to move with them.

Plus as someone who has spent nearly 2 decades in various leadership positions, listening to your people and following where they indicate they want to be led, is not always abdication or weakness but a matter of how you then take that on and make it yours. Leaders who think it should all be about them having the idea, and lacking the trust to let their people steer them, are the worst kind.

 

[johnnychips]

I am of the view that the 2m needs to be reduced as life cannot continue as it is, maybe reduce it to 1m. However the number of daily fatalities and new infections are still high (in comparison to countries that have lifted restrictions and are reopening their economies/borders). Some form of restrictions (face masks ? / quarantine) need to remain until we are down to constant 2 figure (and occasionaly 1-10) fatatites and new infections in the low 3 figures.
This needs to be done with an effective track and trace system. I am not bothered if it is 'world beating' or not. I just want to see something that does what it says on the tin.

This is a bizarre thing that I don’t think will work with technological tracing: most governments, even the ‘praised’ ones like Singapore and Germany seem to be scratching their heads at the moment.

As for ‘human’ tracing, this is difficult: as @Bletchleyite has said, if you got CV symptoms, you would warn anyone you knew you had been in contact with anyway; but after that - I can’t think of anybody I’ve been in close contact with for fifteen minutes whom I don’t know for the past three months in any case.

 

[45107]

Yes, because what “is” their experience?
I am an expert in several fields and what I know is just what that really means especially when it is something even slightly new or different.
Johnson et al (since it is far more than him) may well be a poor leader but the people are already ignoring the “rules”. Look around parks, town centres - people are increasingly treating this with contempt and the impact on jobs and lives is horrific. If he wants to even keep the pretence of beinhe needs to move with them.

Plus as someone who has spent nearly 2 decades in various leadership positions, listening to your people and following where they indicate they want to be led, is not always abdication or weakness but a matter of how you then take that on and make it yours. Leaders who think it should all be about them having the idea, and lacking the trust to let their people steer them, are the worst kind.

There is nothing wrong with listening to your people. In a work/business environment this is useful but it is GENERALLY related to one specific area or industry and does not have an affect on the whole country. When leading a country, it is should not about 'following the crowd' and agreeing to whoever shouts the loudest, as the views and opinions are so diverse. There needs to be leadership which involves taking into account all views along with the risks, benefits and loss of popularity.

 

[Mugby]

So the Government should ignore the people with experience of this type of situation and take the populist "what the people want" approach without regard for the health consequences. Yes, there are conseuquences for the economy (as there are throughout the world), but these are nothing compared with what is coming next January.

What experience?

We were told it was a new disease about which nothing was known. They made up most of their pronouncements as they went along!

 

[Huntergreed]

Yes, because what “is” their experience?
I am an expert in several fields and what I know is just what that really means especially when it is something even slightly new or different.
Johnson et al (since it is far more than him) may well be a poor leader but the people are already ignoring the “rules”. Look around parks, town centres - people are increasingly treating this with contempt and the impact on jobs and lives is horrific. If he wants to even keep the pretence of beinhe needs to move with them.

Plus as someone who has spent nearly 2 decades in various leadership positions, listening to your people and following where they indicate they want to be led, is not always abdication or weakness but a matter of how you then take that on and make it yours. Leaders who think it should all be about them having the idea, and lacking the trust to let their people steer them, are the worst kind.

They are trained in epidemiology and to examine situations from a medical perspective, without considering other factors including economic ones which are growing in importance every day. Ask anyone on the street 'if I cough and you don't want to intake my droplets, would you be better off at 1m or 2m away from me?' anyone on the street could answer that. It's quite obvious that 2m is 'safer' than 1m, however, the scientists are looking at this and the impact it has on transmission in isolation, without considering the hugely detrimental effects this has on the economy, our mental health, and our general ability to run as a functional society.

With regards to your points on leadership, I somewhat agree with what you say, however, I do think it's important to distinguish between 'listening to the people' in normal circumstances who will give a genuine account of what the effect the particular issue is having on daily life is and 'listening to the population you terrified and have convinced they will die from a virus if we come out of lockdown', which is happening here. We need to be listening to experts, but not JUST medical experts, we need to be hearing from economists to determine the best economic approach, behavioural scientists to understand how the behaviour of people will change as measures change and likely compliance levels, psychologists and psychiatrists to understand the effects of the restrictions on mental health, business owners to understand the effects of the restrictions on the practical side of running a business etc. We need to be consulting experts in almost every field rather than consulting purely medical experts who, of course, will err on the side of caution, as this is going to cause vast economic damage. I do have hope that the UK government do seem to be changing their approach to a more well-balanced approach that considers all aspects of society, and I can only hope that the Scottish government will follow suit so that I can return to living my life in a much more 'normal' way than the quite frankly miserable existence we're all facing at the moment.

 

[corfield]

They are trained in epidemiology and to examine situations from a medical perspective, without considering other factors including economic ones which are growing in importance every day. Ask anyone on the street 'if I cough and you don't want to intake my droplets, would you be better off at 1m or 2m away from me?' anyone on the street could answer that. It's quite obvious that 2m is 'safer' than 1m, however, the scientists are looking at this and the impact it has on transmission in isolation, without considering the hugely detrimental effects this has on the economy, our mental health, and our general ability to run as a functional society.

And 10m is safer than 2m and 100m is safer than 10m and so on. This entire topic is entirely being made up as they go along.

I agree, the medical science, such as it is, is just one facet here and has been given undue priority whereby “experts” who are in fact outside of their expertise.

Wrecking the country and causing vast damage to 10s of millions of lives should be a far more pressing concern.

We are going to look back in hindsight and feel absolutely about the hyperbole and over reaction to this. We will get statistics on how the smashing of peoples’ lives has ruined their life, affected their health, how delaying vast swathes of other medical treatment cost other lives both now and in the future, how keeping children away from school damaged many of their life chances, their food intake, the people trapped with those they shouldnt be. The lack of things being done that will save and improve lives in the future. How the economic damage will reduce wealth and quality and access to healthcare as well as countless other lost opportunities.

None of this will actually be hindsight as it was obvious from the outset our media and opposition driven politics with “leaders” only interested in their own short term benefits, are incapable of running anything sensibly as the embarassing furore over the return is showing in everythint from schools to apps to public transport.


Leadership and followership are intertwined - as a famous general said something “I lead where they go”.

Society has not yet fully protested, partly due to the smothering of dissent by the media who are in massive self-righteous groupthink mode, and a police driven by the same mindset. Yet look around and people are widely ignoring it and have done. The Government is now being driven by politics of opposition and the media -the former are solely interested in using this to damage the Government including the vast financial damage this will do which will savage anything else they want to do.

We need to stop all this nonsese, get almost everyone back to complete normal and focus our resources on supporting those groups that are at risk. For instance my elderly mother still cannot get a food delivery slot because hordes of low risk people have booked them all up due to laziness - this is where clear focussing on at risk would work. My brother and partner are facing bankruptcy because the benefits are inadeqaute to cover their loss of income and she is high risk - but we splurge vast sums of money on paying people and companies not to work yet who could quite easily carry on at low risk.

Notwithstanding the unprecedented nature of this, our response has been massive shotgun blasts to both feet, legs, arms and if we don’t snap out of it, the torso.

 

[YorksDMU]

Well, here’s a link to the way the BBC are reporting about the proposed relaxation from 2m to 1m that’s to be announced next week. It’s from the Politics section on the BBC website.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53127213

The government will "bring forward proposals" on how to safely reduce the 2m social distancing rule in England this week, says Matt Hancock.

The health secretary said the distance could be lowered with "mitigations" to cut the risk of transmission.

Labour said it would support a change to 1m "under certain circumstances".

Mr Hancock confirmed new easing of lockdown measures would be announced in the coming days, including whether pubs and restaurants can re-open on 4 July.

Boris Johnson said the government was "sticking like glue" to the roadmap it announced in May - when it said the venues could re-open on 4 July "at the earliest".

He added: "We are going step-by-step, making things easier for people, helping people to see more of each other, allowing more social contact, more social interaction, and we will be setting all that out.

"But it's very important that we don't lose our vice like grip on the disease. We have got to keep it on the floor where we have got it and so we have got to keep making those trade-offs."

So, it seems to be that we are finally to be released from the shackles of two metre distancing from the 4th July. But masks or face coverings could be one of those ‘mitigations’ that mention is made of by Mr. Hancock. I will be happy to continue to wear a face covering on the trains if it means I can continue to use them. So let’s now wait for the announcement, which will be by, presumably, by Mr. Johnson.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well, here’s a link to the way the BBC are reporting about the proposed relaxation from 2m to 1m that’s to be announced next week.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53127213

That sounds quite like what I was suggesting - 2m if you can (no reason not to do 2m in queues, for example), you can go lower if you need to provided you put other measures in place. That is indeed what the piece of publicity I posted above seems to suggest.

 

[Mag_seven]

That sounds quite like what I was suggesting - 2m if you can (no reason not to do 2m in queues, for example), you can go lower if you need to provided you put other measures in place. That is indeed what the piece of publicity I posted above seems to suggest.

I disagree - we cannot have a patchwork quilt of 1m here, 2m there or whatever. That will only lead to confusion and potential conflict if people are unsure what "rule" applies dependant on where they are at the time. It has to be 1m everywhere.

 

[Bantamzen]

That sounds quite like what I was suggesting - 2m if you can (no reason not to do 2m in queues, for example), you can go lower if you need to provided you put other measures in place. That is indeed what the piece of publicity I posted above seems to suggest.

I disagree - we cannot have a patchwork quilt of 1m here, 2m there or whatever. That will only lead to confusion and potential conflict if people are unsure what "rule" applies dependant on where they are at the time. It has to be 1m everywhere.

Exactly, having a "try to keep 2m apart" will just cause confusion in the long run. Just say "try to keep 1m apart", or perhaps even easier "just try to keep a reasonable distance, say an arm's length away when you can". I know the latter doesn't exactly trip off the tongue, but if the distance is to be reduced let's at least relax the prescriptive distance to something that can be determined by common sense.

 

[Starmill]

I disagree - we cannot have a patchwork quilt of 1m here, 2m there or whatever.

That's kind of what we have today. Most people make an effort. If it's easy they achieve way more than 2 metres. If it's even slightly tricky then 2 metres isn't respected at all, though most people will still try to avoid invading your personal space. Exactly as always.

 

[Starmill]

That sounds quite like what I was suggesting - 2m if you can (no reason not to do 2m in queues, for example), you can go lower if you need to provided you put other measures in place. That is indeed what the piece of publicity I posted above seems to suggest.

I think it would be most foolish for a business which has proven its operation at 2 metres to go to the trouble of relaying the queuing marks to 1 metre. I'm not quite sure how that would achieve anything. It wouldn't get more customers thorough the door for example.

 

[Huntergreed]

I think it would be most foolish for a business which has proven its operation at 2 metres to go to the trouble of relaying the queuing marks to 1 metre. I'm not quite sure how that would achieve anything. It wouldn't get more customers thorough the door for example.

I agree with this. If a business is able to run successfully at 2 metres then I see no reason why it should spend time, effort, and money reducing when it's going to have little effect on the success of the business, however with the rule reducing to 1m this would, I imagine, ultimately be down to each individual business using common sense and deciding whether it's worth reducing things or keeping them as they are.

I do however think that the official guideline should be reduced for all businesses, with businesses permitted to use discretion to determine whether adjusting would make any difference to the success of the business.

 

[corfield]

I think it would be most foolish for a business which has proven its operation at 2 metres to go to the trouble of relaying the queuing marks to 1 metre. I'm not quite sure how that would achieve anything. It wouldn't get more customers thorough the door for example.

Nonsense, it would take about an hour to lay additonal tape at the halfway point even in something as large as B&Q. For a supermarket where this is just in the checkout queue, 15 mins work tops.

1m is about the normal foot to foot spacing in a queue anyway so just remove it all...

 

[Class 33]

So it's looking very likely the 2 metre guidance will be reduced to 1 metre guidance from 4th July(or possibly earlier). That's a big improvement. Though the only thing is how long will the 1 metre "social distancing" guidance then drag on for?! I hope not too long. Hopefully no later than September, and then we can get back to "the old normal". I hate the phrase "The new normal" that is constantly being mentioned by the media, as though it's going to be like this forever now! I prefer the phrase "The temporary normal", which I hope it will be, before going back to "The old normal"!

 

[talldave]

That sounds quite like what I was suggesting - 2m if you can (no reason not to do 2m in queues, for example), you can go lower if you need to provided you put other measures in place. That is indeed what the piece of publicity I posted above seems to suggest.

We don't need queues, we don't need patronising labels on the floor, it can all go. Only in the xmas shopping crush do we really get that close to one another, and I'm more than happy to avoid that.

 

[duncanp]

The latest nonsense being reported today is that you might have to register before you go to the pub.

Requiring people to register or book online before they visit a pub (or coffee shop, restaurant) will kill their trade just as much as having a 2 metre social distancing rule. You might as well not bother reducing it to 1 metre in the first place.

It is becoming a little wearisome having all these petty regulations in place.

I had to visit Birmingham New Street today to pick up a ticket I had booked in advance for a journey on Wednesday. (A leisure journey and I am not a key worker, so don't tell the TOC (Transport for Wales) otherwise they might have me publicly flogged)

On entering the station there was a tiresome one way system in operation, meaning that you could only enter the platforms from the A end of the station and exit them from the B end. In addition, certain doors were exit only, and other doors were entrance only. Naturally there were jobsworths all around the station to tell you off if you went in the wrong direction.

Now I could perhaps see the logic of having a one way system at busy times, such as the morning and evening peak, but not on a Sunday morning when there were very few people using the station anyway.

 

[greyman42]

The latest nonsense being reported today is that you might have to register before you go to the pub.

Requiring people to register or book online before they visit a pub (or coffee shop, restaurant) will kill their trade just as much as having a 2 metre social distancing rule. You might as well not bother reducing it to 1 metre in the first place.

Do the idiots who dream up these ideas ever go to pubs? People often nip into pubs for a quick drink when they fancy one or while they are waiting for their train to use a railway themed example. They do not plan visits with military precision.
What about the elderly who don't have smart phones? Many will of been looking forward to a visit to the pub for the company after been in lockdown for months. Are they going to be barred?

 

[duncanp]

On reading the article a bit further, it seems that you would have to give your contact details to the bar staff on entering a pub, so that the NHS contact tracers can get hold of you if there is an outbreak linked to the pub.

I can think of several issues with this policy:-

• People may not be willing to give their contact details
• People may give a completely false phone number/e-mail address, especially if there is a reason that they don't want someone to know about their visit to a pub, and bar staff certainly won't have time to check whether any address given is genuine or not.
• Not every pub will observe this rule all the time.
• How are pubs going to store the records that they take? If it is on random scraps of paper these could get lost, and if you have to log it on a computer this will increase the time taken to get served.
• The wrong details could be taken, particularly in a busy pub where there is lots of noise.
• People may also be concerned about data protection - how can they be sure that their details will not fall into unauthorised hands due to negligence on the part of the pub.

I can't help thinking this is actually a tactic that was used on Yes Minister (nearly 40 years ago!) whereby details of a controversial policy were deliberately leaked to the Sunday papers the weekend before a policy announcement just to see what the reaction would be. If there was a negative reaction, the polciy would be quietly dropped from the actual announcement.

 

[Starmill]

Nonsense, it would take about an hour to lay additonal tape at the halfway point even in something as large as B&Q. For a supermarket where this is just in the checkout queue, 15 mins work tops.

1m is about the normal foot to foot spacing in a queue anyway so just remove it all...

For a large business to execute this nationally would obviously be something that requires some planning and preparation. Same would go for the decision to remove it all. It's all tied up with the wider strategy which includes the questions over the number of people are allowed in at any time and what staff do what role where, and other things. And fundamentally it would need to be answered what the benefits are?

Your view might be that they should abandon it all and do nothing, but unless you're running a large firm...?

Only in the xmas shopping crush do we really get that close to one another

I don't think this is true at all.

 

[Starmill]

Though the only thing is how long will the 1 metre "social distancing" guidance then drag on for?!

The Health Secretary is on record for saying that social distancing will be required in some form, though not necessarily the current form, for more than a year.

before going back to "The old normal"!

Except that most people absolutely don't want a wholesale return to the way things were, which is what the "old normal" is generally understood to mean.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Regarding the thing about registering in a pub, there are quite a few licenced premises that already do this, and I half recall that one city, but I forget which, made it mandatory to do this in order to have a 2am licence. What they do is "ID" everybody regardless of age or appearance, and scan the ID on entry. Two businesses that I know do it in MK are Vodka Revolution in Xscape (though they don't do it all day, only in the evening) and Pink Punters. It wouldn't be technically difficult for companies to provide on a "software as a service" basis a secure means of retaining that data online via a mobile device app, you'd do it using a tablet or mobile phone without a SIM card.

The only thing I fear slightly about this is that it's likely if that system comes in in all licenced premises (and if door staff become mandatory to do it) it will never be removed, because it would make the Police's lives much easier to have a database of photographs to check against the CCTV if there was trouble. I don't like pubs with door staff, it suggests they're rough, as why would you have them if they weren't actually needed?

But moving away from that, it would have a benefit in COVID terms - you could do something like "no social distancing is required in this pub, however if a case is recorded everyone who was present at the time of the case will be considered a close contact and required by law to self isolate for 14 days", and similarly the pub would have to close for that period as the staff could also be infected. A bit like the school thing in a way - a local pub and its regulars are sort of a bubble!

 

[ashkeba]

Should be 1.5m like Germany and others (now Switzerland too) but there's no poll option for that.