The viability of social distancing, and confusion over whether it should be 1m or 2m

[Bletchleyite]

Actually, the benefit of wearing masks has been quite strongly proven in situations where adequate social distances cannot be maintained and is recommended by the WHO. It doesn't do much to stop you from getting infected, but wearing a mask significantly reduces the risk of you spreading the infection to anyone else. Countries with a high percentage of mask wearing have some of the lowest infection rates.

I think there's been a lot of confusion over this, at the start there were pronouncements that masks were worthless unless they were surgical-grade, but that was looking at their efficacy at protecting the wearer. It has later been found that they are much more effective at protecting others from the wearer, but people keep, accidentally or deliberately, harking back to that original pronouncement.

 

[DB]

Actually, the benefit of wearing masks has been quite strongly proven in situations where adequate social distances cannot be maintained

No it hasn't - e.g. see this meta-analysis of published studies:

Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID-19: A rapid systematic review

The current pandemic of COVID-19 has lead to conflicting opinions on whether wearing facemasks outside of health care facilities protects against the infection. To better understand the value of wearing facemasks we undertook a rapid systematic review of existing scientific evidence about...

www.medrxiv.org

It concludes:
"The evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks as a protective measure against COVID-19. However, there is enough evidence to support the use of facemasks for short periods of time by particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations."

 

[najaB]

"The evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks as a protective measure against COVID-19. However, there is enough evidence to support the use of facemasks for short periods of time by particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations."

Not just vulnerable people. To quote the WHO's recommendation on mask wearing, from the section about mask wearing by the general populace (https://www.who.int/emergencies/dis...of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak - page 7):

Settings where a physical distancing cannot be achieved (close contact)| General public on transportation (e.g., on a bus, plane, trains) Specific working conditions which places the employee in close contact or potential close contact with others e.g., social workers, cashiers, servers |Potential benefit for source control | Non-medical mask

 

[DB]

If you quote that WHO guidance in full, it says:

" Non-medical, fabric masks are being used by many people in public areas, but there has been limited evidence on their effectiveness and WHO does not recommend their widespread use among the public for control of COVID-19. However, for areas of widespread transmission, with limited capacity for implementing control measures and especially in settings where physical distancing of at least 1 metre is not possible – such as on public transport, in shops or in other confined or crowded environments – WHO advises governments to encourage the general public to use non-medical fabric masks."

So on the one hand, they concede that there is 'limited' evidence and they don't recommend them, but then say to use them in some circumstances anyway. This looks suspiciously like being seen to be doing something rather than an evidenced strategy.

Elsewhere, they also concede that:

" At the present time, the widespread use of masks everywhere is not supported by high-quality scientific evidence, and there are potential benefits and harms to consider. "

This country doesn't seem to have considered the harms at all.

However you read this, it cannot be claimed that masks are 'strongly proven' to be of use - at best, the evidence is weak.

 

[Bantamzen]

If you quote that WHO guidance in full, it says:



So on the one hand, they concede that there is 'limited' evidence and they don't recommend them, but then say to use them in some circumstances anyway. This looks suspiciously like being seen to be doing something rather than an evidenced strategy.

Elsewhere, they also concede that:



This country doesn't seem to have considered the harms at all.

However you read this, it cannot be claimed that masks are 'strongly proven' to be of use - at best, the evidence is weak.

Which is why in the various government guidelines around reopening businesses state within them that the evidence that community mask wearing is an effective method of preventing spread of the virus is generally considered weak. Indeed previously the government more than hinted that any compulsory mask wearing was a measure to "reassure", not necessarily to help reduce the risk of people spreading. Regular hand washing, and obviously covering your face when coughing or sneezing, are considered much more an effective method of reducing spread.

The WHO's position on masks shifted slightly recently from "we don't recommend their use in the general population" to "well you might want to consider it, but we're still really not sure". In some ways it seemed more like a political shift to suit the position of governments that had already gone down the mask route, rather than one wholly based around the science. And they did also point out that wearing masks could risk the populations getting a false sense of security, and not maintaining a higher level of hygiene as a result. Plus of course if people are fiddling around with masks, they increase the risk on contact spreading, which might actually increase the risk to people around them as the virus can potentially be viable on some surfaces far longer than it can in the air. A double-edged sword if you will.

However there is some good news for those of us not keen on some of the measures, some countries are now starting to relax their measures both in terms of masks and social distancing. Hopefully we can start to reassess the actual risk levels, and act more accordingly.

 

[Class 33]

However there is some good news for those of us not keen on some of the measures, some countries are now starting to relax their measures both in terms of masks and social distancing. Hopefully we can start to reassess the actual risk levels, and act more accordingly.

Which countries are relaxing their social distancing?

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Which countries are relaxing their social distancing?

England, from this coming Saturday.

 

[Bantamzen]

Which countries are relaxing their social distancing?

Quite a few European countries are planning for relaxation, and even removal of social distancing in the coming months. Germany for example is exploring options to start having fans back at Bundesliga games from September, perhaps not full stadiums at first but that will come.

 

[Class 33]

Quite a few European countries are planning for relaxation, and even removal of social distancing in the coming months. Germany for example is exploring options to start having fans back at Bundesliga games from September, perhaps not full stadiums at first but that will come.

Good. Let's hope the UK follows suite. Can't wait to see the back of all this "Social distancing", "Please keep your distance", etc everywhere.

 

[DB]

Good. Let's hope the UK follows suite. Can't wait to see the back of all this "Social distancing", "Please keep your distance", etc everywhere.

And have you noticed just how many shops now have posters smugly proclaiming "We are practicing social distancing to keep you safe", or similar. It's just irritting - the term 'social distancing' is nonsense (it's physical distancing), and it doesn't 'keep you safe'. It might, possibly, slightly reduce the risks of catching the virus if you are unlucky enough to be close to someone who has it, but that's about as far as it goes.

 

[Enthusiast]

the term 'social distancing' is nonsense

Indeed it is. It should be called "anti-social distancing".

 

[MikeWM]

And have you noticed just how many shops now have posters smugly proclaiming "We are practicing social distancing to keep you safe", or similar.

So far I've found that the likelihood of my going into a shop is inversely proportional to the number (and wordiness) of notices they've put up in the window. (And/or the number of rainbows they have in the window. The correct number is, of course, zero). I suspect I'll have a similar reaction to pubs/restaurants etc.

the term 'social distancing' is nonsense (it's physical distancing),

One small plus point for Wilkos - they're the only place I've seen that correctly calls it 'physical' rather than 'social'.

and it doesn't 'keep you safe'.

And it isn't the job of a shop, pub, workplace, railway, etc. to 'keep me safe' from catching a virus, even if it could. They need to make sure that eg. the ceiling of the shop doesn't fall on my head while I'm in there, that's the only level of safety that should be expected.

 

[Huntergreed]

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine to prevent it growing again. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed it is. It should be called "anti-social distancing".

"Physical distancing" is better - "social distancing" implies you have to keep yourself to yourself, which isn't true.

 

[Scrotnig]

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

Even if we get a completely effective vaccine, I can see people like her saying we need to maintain social distancing restrictions indefinitely "as a precaution".

They are obsessed with restricting everybody and interfering in people's lives, that's what it is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine to prevent it growing again. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

Yes and no. If we do eliminate it, we would need to close our borders to any country that hadn't or we'd need distancing, one or the other.

Even if we get a completely effective vaccine, I can see people like her saying we need to maintain social distancing restrictions indefinitely "as a precaution".

They are obsessed with restricting everybody and interfering in people's lives, that's what it is.

I generally quite like the SNP's politics, but it does have a strong "nanny stateist" element which I like far less.

 

[philosopher]

Good. Let's hope the UK follows suite. Can't wait to see the back of all this "Social distancing", "Please keep your distance", etc everywhere.

I think it is becoming increasingly clear that social distancing is just sustainable either socially or economically. Our world is not set up for people to kept one or two metres apart from each other and it goes against human nature. Floating of social distancing regulations will become an increasingly big problem over the rest of the year.

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine to prevent it growing again. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

Even New Zealand got rid of social distancing when they eliminated Covid-19 from their country.

 

[BJames]

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine to prevent it growing again. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

She should have a look at New Zealand.

The only thing is though that they'd have to close their land border to England in order to stop coronavirus coming back. This would prove incredibly challenging.

Edit: written at the same time as above, sorry.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even New Zealand got rid of social distancing when they eliminated Covid-19 from their country.

Though they have effectively closed their borders, which is the other option.

 

[DB]

It seems to have reached the stage where politicians are trying to out-do each other with over the top measures to show how much they 'care'...

 

[Mag_seven]

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine to prevent it growing again. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

That won't happen because free people won't stand for it. The problem with politicians (and to the same extent academics) is that they don't live in the real world.

 

[HSTEd]

Nicola Sturgeon mentioned in today’s briefing that even if the virus was eliminated we need to continue with social distancing until we can eradicate it through a vaccine to prevent it growing again. I sincerely hope this isn’t the case

Well duh.
This is what happens when you adopt the suppression strategy.

It will be like this from now on, eternally.

They sold the lockdown to the public based on a lie about it's duration and by pouring away the accumulated wealth of a generation in a few months.
If they had been honest the public never would have stood for it.

 

[dm1]

I think one of the most significant failures in the British response to the pandemic has been its failure to communicate properly, consistently and with a clear and understandable message (that isn't being undermined by polticians constantly).

I would contrast that with the communication of the Swiss government with its population. From the start of the pandemic, they have had one of the best public health campaigns I have ever seen.

If you look at the posters shown here you see clear, consistent messaging. The posters started with a yellow background. As the situation developed, the red posters were absolutely everywhere (workplaces, universities, on the streets on advertising billboards everywhere, in trains, stations (I have a very dystopian photo of an almost empty Zürich main station with that poster on every single one of the electronic advertising screens as far as the eye can see) and supermarkets. As the pandemic went on and lockdown measures started to be relaxed, they switched to the pink posters, and later to the blue ones. Each time the colour change represented some kind of relaxation or change in protection measures.

Many of the posters were not supplied or hung up by the government directly. In many cases, they just requested that various organisations do so on their own - but since they wanted to play their part in the pandemic response, the vast majority did so without question. That way we also avoided the situation of each organisation seemingly having its own campaign (yes, many did have their own informational posters relating to their internal circumstances, but this was always in addition to rather than replacing government advice and posters).

Also impressive is how all the information was made available in a huge number of languages.

Switzerland's pandemic response wasn't perfect, but communication is one aspect that was done extremely well. Given that the UK is a country that takes pride in its advertising industry, I'm surprised that something similar wasn't done in the UK. Three word slogans and reams of half-contradictory guidance can only get you so far.

Switzerland reduced its distance from 2m to 1.5m this week - but this level of communication meant it wasn't much of a cause for debate. It was just one more step in the return to normal life, of which there have been many already.

 

[Enthusiast]

If they had been honest the public never would have stood for it.

Quite true. If they had said:

"This lockdown will go on for three months, the children will be off school for at least six months and the ancillary "guidance" (which will be rigorously enforced if and when shops, bars and restaurants are allowed to reopen) and associated measures will go on indefinitely. Oh, and by the way, it will cost every man, woman and child in the country an average of £5k"

Would people have said "yeah. Go on then"?

There may have been a little more opposition. But they would have got away with most of it because the establishments which were closed and which are going to be under the eagle eye of their Local Authorities when they reopen to ensure they follow the "guidance" will still have complied. Unless there was to be wholesale mutiny from businesses that is their Joker in the pack. And I don't see the joke.

 

[scotrail158713]

"Physical distancing" is better - "social distancing" implies you have to keep yourself to yourself, which isn't true.

That's one of the areas that Nicola Sturgeon has got right. I don’t think I’ve ever heard her refer to it as social distancing - it’s always been “physical distancing” whenever I’ve heard her.

 

[johntea]

I've found recently on my health since having to wear a face mask for travel and work is that I seem to develop frequent headaches - the annoying sort of ones you would associate with a hangover but I haven't drank alcohol in at least 2 months...maybe not related to the face mask but it does seem coincidental timing

In fact just this morning I got off the train and felt an immediate sense of nausea coming on, I felt like I was going to just collapse to the floor and pass out but luckily there was a nearby bench I managed to stagger to and sit down which brought me back round a bit after 15 minutes, although I then had a splitting headache for most of the day!

 

[Ian Cunningham]

That's one of the areas that Nicola Sturgeon has got right. I don’t think I’ve ever heard her refer to it as social distancing - it’s always been “physical distancing” whenever I’ve heard her.

I think there has been deliberate use of different language by Scottish and Welsh Governments to differentiate between the different approaches eg we have "Test and Protect" Wales has "Test Trace Protect" and England has "Test and Trace" - same goal but 3 different systems. It might seem like semantics but it should hopefully reduce confusion as each nation's restrictions are released (or re-applied if happen to be in Leicester)

 

[Smidster]

One of the big problems I think we have at the moment comes down to communication and peoples expectations of how long this will go on for. Back in March there was no clear messaging that this was a year or more and so people thought that after a short period of heavy restrictions things would largely be back to normal.

If you look round this forum, and others, some people seem to have the impression that Social Distancing will come to an end by the Autumn and with that we will be able to forget about endless queues, masks and perspex everywhere.

The sad reality, and I wish those in power were more honest about this and had been since the get-go, is that we are in this for the long haul. There is almost no possibility of restrictions not being in place well into next year and that is without the potential for a second wave in the winter. At least a Socially Distant Christmas gives you an excuse to avoid any family you don't like.

 

[Bantamzen]

One of the big problems I think we have at the moment comes down to communication and peoples expectations of how long this will go on for. Back in March there was no clear messaging that this was a year or more and so people thought that after a short period of heavy restrictions things would largely be back to normal.

If you look round this forum, and others, some people seem to have the impression that Social Distancing will come to an end by the Autumn and with that we will be able to forget about endless queues, masks and perspex everywhere.

The sad reality, and I wish those in power were more honest about this and had been since the get-go, is that we are in this for the long haul. There is almost no possibility of restrictions not being in place well into next year and that is without the potential for a second wave in the winter. At least a Socially Distant Christmas gives you an excuse to avoid any family you don't like.

The reality is that long term social distancing will make many businesses, industries and even transport networks unviable. This will lead to long term unemployment for many hundreds of thousands of people, meaning there won't be a Christmas for many. And do you honestly believe that people will put up with queueing into every store they need to go to when the weather starts to turn? The government got really, really lucky with the weather for the majority of the lockdown, and even then many stores quietly loosened their queueing requirements / numbers in stores to reduce the length & frequency of queues.

The scientists will tell you that long term social distancing is the way forward, but they only deal in one facet of modern life and will generally err on the side of caution. But the science is not the only driver, what point is there risking the economy when the same actually pays for the science backed cure / treatment? Its a fine balance, and one that we are on the edge of. Tank the economy, and winter won't just see more covid cases & deaths, it will see many none covid-related ailments and deaths.

To put it bluntly, covid is not our only concern, indeed it may now not even be the priority.

 

[birchesgreen]

If you look round this forum, and others, some people seem to have the impression that Social Distancing will come to an end by the Autumn and with that we will be able to forget about endless queues, masks and perspex everywhere.

As an extreme example of that impression, i saw someone gloating on social media earlier that his friends in Leicester wouldn't be able to "celebrate" the end of the pandemic in the pub on Saturday like everyone else. The government / parts of the media have given the impression its over...