How seriously are you taking social distancing?

[The Clamp]

How wide is that pathway?

Which pathway?

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Which pathway?

Oh you are naughty.....

 

[The Clamp]

Oh you are naughty.....

I’m sure you’re attempting to make some poorly thought out ‘point’ but you’ve lost me thus far.

 

[LamieRobertson]

I’m sure you’re attempting to make some poorly thought out ‘point’ but you’ve lost me thus far.

Yes but both of you are entertaining me ..so please carry on ..I’m easily pleased

 

[Deleted member 2719]

I’m sure you’re attempting to make some poorly thought out ‘point’ but you’ve lost me thus far.

You are suggesting people are terrified to walk past someone on a pathway, is the pathway under 2m wide?

 

[The Clamp]

You are suggesting people are terrified to walk past someone on a pathway, is the pathway under 2m wide?

What difference does it make? You’re walking past them, not alongside them. Passing somebody for a second on a path poses virtually zero risk unless they cough or spit in your mouth as you pass.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

How would they do that on the steps to the beach or the narrow paths?!

Anyone seeing that many cars on arrival should drive on, not park up.

I just don't understand why people have to flock to the main honeypots rather than using their imaginations and going somewhere a bit more isolated.

This. Seeing pictures from around the country today, a real head in hands moment. We've all been a bit cheeky with the rules in some way, but come on, that's just stupidity and selfish.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

This is a really rewarding twitter thread, looking at track and trace evidence and what can be learnt about transmission. The link to the first post of 20 is below

[tweet]1257392348788596738[/tweet]

Here are the conclusions.
In conclusion, contact tracing data is crucial to understand real transmission dynamics. Cautionary note: This data & interpretation is based on the available evidence as of May 4th. Our understanding might change based on community testing/lifting lockdown measures.

While we have limited data, similar high risk transmission pattern could be seen in other crowded & connected indoor environments such as crowded office spaces, other workplace environment, packed restaurants/cafes, cramped apartment buildings etc.

Conclusion 2: (a) we need to redesign our living/working spaces & rethink how to provide better, ventilated living/working environment for those who live in deprived & cramped areas; (b) avoid close, sustained contact indoors & in public transport, & maintain personal hygiene.

The more interesting bits are the key risks for infection, identified in the tracing

Being in close contact with someone infected for 15 minutes or more.
Being in a room with someone infected for upwards of 2 hours.
Poor Hygiene (hand washing, face touching)
Being over 60 less able to resist infection.

Again I hope this is all very obvious. What is more important here is the low risk of infection

Outdoors
Brushing past someone
and the low infection and ability to pass on the virus from the young < 10

With regards to the Birling Gap problem. Personally I would not go there at the moment, especially in the middle of the day. There are plenty of more obscure beauty spots I would happily visit and quieter times to go. However I would also not fret if others decided to go and do this. The individual risk of infection will be slightly increased, the bigger risk of widespread infection seems to be relatively small. Based on what we know, this all seems like great news.

That does sound good, but can we take it as true? Also, don't show that to people who have little brain cells or common sense, they'll definitely take the piss.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

What difference does it make? You’re walking past them, not alongside them. Passing somebody for a second on a path poses virtually zero risk unless they cough or spit in your mouth as you pass.

Well there we go.

I am speechless.

Think of it like this everyone is carrying a gun and they can kill within the range of 2 metres, but you don't know who's gun is loaded.

It's Russian roulette.

Stay alert and keep your distance, it really is that simple.

 

[The Clamp]

Well there we go.

I am speechless.

Think of it like this everyone is carrying a gun and they can kill within the range of 2 metres, but you don't know who's gun is loaded.

It's Russian roulette.

Stay alert and keep your distance, it really is that simple.

I suggest you read the medical advice and perhaps do some research on infection control. Walking past someone for less than a few seconds puts you at a very low risk of infection.

Now, obviously, distance where you can, as much as you can but let’s not be silly. Walking past someone at less than two metres is fine. It’s not ideal but it’s fine.

I’m sorry to read that you are speechless.

 

[LamieRobertson]

That does sound good, but can we take it as true? Also, don't show that to people who have little brain cells or common sense, they'll definitely take the piss.

What if you have little brain cells but lots of them...does that beat big brain cells but only a few?

 

[Bodian]

I think that the fact I can go to work a 15 mile drive (engineering) lots of touching metal, lifting heavy stuff there is no chance of SD and have been all but ordered by Boris to go. But the fact I cant drive to see my Mum, who is house bound and living with my sister who works in the NHS makes the whole thing nonsensical...I now see workmates every day but havnt seen my Mum and one of my sons since February.

I am being quite good but I fully understand the folks who have sai "fxxk it" We are allowed to do things we dont want to do but I cant buy new pants and go for a pint !!

My wife broke the lockdown rules last week to visit her dad for the first-time - staying in the garden. We've been in touch everyday on the phone for the duration, but it doesn't replace seeing someone properly. He was shuffly and confused, so we have since been back twice to see how he is. Yesterday he was so bad we had the ambulance out twice, they were reluctant to take him to hospital but finally they did. Had a scan today - has bleeding on the brain from a fall at the beginning of lockdown, and needs cranial surgery.

I have been a big fan of lockdown - but this sort of thing really shows that the 'rules' aren't entirely commonsense. If we hadn't broken them, he'd probably be dead by now.

And his partner, who lives alone about five miles away hasn't seen him since lockdown started (and may never see him again - depending on how the operation goes). How can it be entirely logical that I can live with my wife and be close to her all the time, yet two single people in separate houses cannot interact properly. What is the difference, really, if they had been allowed to visit each other and not others. It still would just have been two people sharing a space.

 

[darkwolf666]

A colleague of mine and a friend of my wife's are both travelling long distances this weekend to see relatives - it really seems the lockdown is over whether the government wants it to be or not.

But it is what the government want. As someone else has titled it, this is herd immunity 2.0.

The government hope the worst is over, but if the figures go up they can blame the stupid public for not doing what they are told.

If the figures go down and stay down they can pat themselves on the collective backs and issue a few more knighthoods for their chums...

 

[Napper]

I suggest you read the medical advice and perhaps do some research on infection control. Walking past someone for less than a few seconds puts you at a very low risk of infection.

Now, obviously, distance where you can, as much as you can but let’s not be silly. Walking past someone at less than two metres is fine. It’s not ideal but it’s fine.

I’m sorry to read that you are speechless.

also the loaded gun analogy pretty ridiculous when you read the stats of serious cases for the numbers . Some of the blind panic is comical

 

[CheeseRolls]

That does sound good, but can we take it as true? Also, don't show that to people who have little brain cells or common sense, they'll definitely take the piss.

True is just the wrong word to use here. It is all about allowing people to make informed choices. On the balance of probability these are guidelines on what is pretty safe. Avoid these and you are unlikely to catch it or pass it on. There is no cast iron guarantee and for that very reason, if you or a close one is vulnerable you would be wise to be more cautious.

There was a super spreader incident earlier in the year centred around a bar in a ski resort, where they played beer pong. Yes put a ping pong ball in your mouth try and get it into someone else's beer glass and repeat. Relatively tame stuff by rugby tour standards of the past, but unlikely to get many takers right now.

If someone has been following the rules for the last 10 weeks and now needs to meet up with family who have similarly been following the rules and or has been social isolating, the chances of this sparking a major outbreak are miniscule.

Sadly as you say there are some people who only seem to understand on and off and these are the people we all need to avoid.

 

[Weststander]

My wife broke the lockdown rules last week to visit her dad for the first-time - staying in the garden. We've been in touch everyday on the phone for the duration, but it doesn't replace seeing someone properly. He was shuffly and confused, so we have since been back twice to see how he is. Yesterday he was so bad we had the ambulance out twice, they were reluctant to take him to hospital but finally they did. Had a scan today - has bleeding on the brain from a fall at the beginning of lockdown, and needs cranial surgery.

I have been a big fan of lockdown - but this sort of thing really shows that the 'rules' aren't entirely commonsense. If we hadn't broken them, he'd probably be dead by now.

And his partner, who lives alone about five miles away hasn't seen him since lockdown started (and may never see him again - depending on how the operation goes). How can it be entirely logical that I can live with my wife and be close to her all the time, yet two single people in separate houses cannot interact properly. What is the difference, really, if they had been allowed to visit each other and not others. It still would just have been two people sharing a space.

I hope the fella makes a full recovery.

A salient story, telling us imho that total social distancing of the old and vulnerable, may not advisable from now on and in any future waves.

 

[Beach Hut]

Walking past someone for less than a few seconds puts you at a very low risk of infection.

Earlier you said zero risk then you say low risk, it may well put you at low risk of infection but it is still a risk some, who may feel vulnerable, do not want to take which is perfectly understandable in my view.

 

[The Clamp]

Earlier you said zero risk then you say low risk, it may well put you at low risk of infection but it is still a risk some, who may feel vulnerable, do not want to take which is perfectly understandable in my view.

I said virtually zero.
Semantics.
And yes, you’re correct. Some people who feel at risk may not want to do that. My advice to them would be to stick to areas where two meters distancing is easier to achieve. It is of course up to people to do what makes them feel safe. Or up to the distancing rules.
However, what they “feel” makes no difference to the fact that passing someone on a path at less than two metres poses very little risk.

 

[A1X]

Meanwhile, on Brighton beach...

[TWEET]1263425621792821248[/TWEET]

 

[Bozza]

True is just the wrong word to use here. It is all about allowing people to make informed choices. On the balance of probability these are guidelines on what is pretty safe. Avoid these and you are unlikely to catch it or pass it on. There is no cast iron guarantee and for that very reason, if you or a close one is vulnerable you would be wise to be more cautious.

There was a super spreader incident earlier in the year centred around a bar in a ski resort, where they played beer pong. Yes put a ping pong ball in your mouth try and get it into someone else's beer glass and repeat. Relatively tame stuff by rugby tour standards of the past, but unlikely to get many takers right now.

If someone has been following the rules for the last 10 weeks and now needs to meet up with family who have similarly been following the rules and or has been social isolating, the chances of this sparking a major outbreak are miniscule.

Sadly as you say there are some people who only seem to understand on and off and these are the people we all need to avoid.

And if "meeting family" involves remaining outside and no physical touching of any kind then the risk of virus transmission, even if anyone is infected, is very, very small indeed.

I guess the "meet one person at a time away from home" rule is because if you had a "you can go round someone's house but stay outside" rule, by the time you do that over a large number of people there will be occasions where some people "just pop inside to use the loo" or "have a quick glass of water, I'm really thirsty" and once that happens, some virus transmission will occur.

My experience, from being outside on walks/runs 3 or 4 times a day is that 99%+ of those we meet are observing social distancing. Whenever I meet people on paths and trails, care is taken to leave as much distance as possible.

The worst offenders I see are teenage boys who seem to be congregating in groups more and more, but at least they're outside.