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

[Hadders]

One thing is certain, most coffee shops do no they operate on small profit margins. There’s a reason why Costa require half a million quid off anyone wanting to take on one of their franchises!

True but I be the individual franchisees aren't making £millions once they've paid their franchise fee, city centre rent etc.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's not about that. Moving from 2m to 1m will make a difference in terms of the viability of public transport and a huge part of our economy and the livelihoods of millions of people. The idea that we can go on like this indefinitely is preposterous.

Yep have to agree. 1 meter from June 1st. If that goes swimmingly - then revisit and no social distancing apart from common sense from August 1st. If there is a resurgence in flu season revisit again. It is a fluid situation

 

[sheff1]

There is a slight problem with any of this.

I reckon a majority of the population couldn’t tell you how long a metre is, to within 50%.

Indeed. Why not use good old Imperial measurements. Brexit means Brexit ..... oh, sorry, wrong slogan.

 

[Bald Rick]

True but I be the individual franchisees aren't making £millions once they've paid their franchise fee, city centre rent etc.

Absolutely. But the point is that someone is making a sh*t load of money.

I remember a coffee vendor who plied his trade from a cart on the forecourt of a north London station about a decade ago. He paid £100 a week for the pitch, and traded only for the morning peak until about 1030, and was popular with his customers. The (obviously evil) owners of the forecourt wanted to rebuild said station forecourt to provide more capacity and a better service for passengers, and as a by product get better value from the property. The assessment demonstrated that the vendor was clearing well into six figures profit. Not bad for a 30 hour week serving coffee and croissants. My memory may be failing me, but I think this was the same chap who bought his croissants at the local Tesco at 0600 each morning, for 50p each, and knocked them out at £1.50.

Of course there was uproar when he was evicted, the area revamped, and much more income received to help industry finances.

 

[yorksrob]

Absolutely. But the point is that someone is making a sh*t load of money.

I remember a coffee vendor who plied his trade from a cart on the forecourt of a north London station about a decade ago. He paid £100 a week for the pitch, and traded only for the morning peak until about 1030, and was popular with his customers. The (obviously evil) owners of the forecourt wanted to rebuild said station forecourt to provide more capacity and a better service for passengers, and as a by product get better value from the property. The assessment demonstrated that the vendor was clearing well into six figures profit. Not bad for a 30 hour week serving coffee and croissants. My memory may be failing me, but I think this was the same chap who bought his croissants at the local Tesco at 0600 each morning, for 50p each, and knocked them out at £1.50.

Of course there was uproar when he was evicted, the area revamped, and much more income received to help industry finances.

Ah, but was he charging less than SSP !

 

[Bald Rick]

Ah, but was he charging less than SSP !

It’s difficult not to.

 

[Hadders]

Absolutely. But the point is that someone is making a sh*t load of money.

I remember a coffee vendor who plied his trade from a cart on the forecourt of a north London station about a decade ago. He paid £100 a week for the pitch, and traded only for the morning peak until about 1030, and was popular with his customers. The (obviously evil) owners of the forecourt wanted to rebuild said station forecourt to provide more capacity and a better service for passengers, and as a by product get better value from the property. The assessment demonstrated that the vendor was clearing well into six figures profit. Not bad for a 30 hour week serving coffee and croissants. My memory may be failing me, but I think this was the same chap who bought his croissants at the local Tesco at 0600 each morning, for 50p each, and knocked them out at £1.50.

Of course there was uproar when he was evicted, the area revamped, and much more income received to help industry finances.

Said coffee cart pitch is probably now a franchised Starbucks or Costa within the revamped station building. Instead of paying £100 a week for the pitch the franchisee will probably be paying 10 times that, plus a fee to Starbucks or Costs for the franchise. They won't be able to buy their croissants from Tesco either. The station owner and whoever owns Starbucks will do well out of the agreement. If sales are good then the franchisee will do ok as well. Once those sales dry up then all three will be worse off, the franchisee and staff taking the biggest hit, I suspect.

Such is progress!

 

[yorksrob]

It’s difficult not to.

Quite !

 

[AM9]

Why is setting an arbitrary date any less preposterous than waiting until the data shows we can relax. "Sensible" Denmark waited.


Yes, that was the evidence given to the Science and Technology Select Committee.

Indeed, on Friday, the same committee heard evidence that, like so many other things, we should keep the 2m distancing until we know more about COVID-19 is transmitted. Basically, "better safe than sorry".

Thanks, - it also confirms my suspicion that the viral load is somewhere near the inverse square of the distance, - similarly, the likelihood of breaching a certain distance within a given space follows a square law in realtion to the number of people in that area. Hence the issue of reducing the mass exercising in tourist hotspots. Maybe the faction of politicians and their followers that are pushing for ever closer social distancing have an agenda to keep the infection rate as near to 1.0 as they dare which in their view might accelerate the achievement of a herd immunity. The only problem is that the presence of immunity in survivors and how long that immunity might last has yet to be established, so it could all end in tears.

 

[yorksrob]

Thanks, - it also confirms my suspicion that the viral load is somewhere near the inverse square of the distance, - similarly, the likelihood of breaching a certain distance within a given space follows a square law in realtion to the number of people in that area. Hence the issue of reducing the mass exercising in tourist hotspots. Maybe the faction of politicians and their followers that are pushing for ever closer social distancing have an agenda to keep the infection rate as near to 1.0 as they dare which in their view might accelerate the achievement of a herd immunity. The only problem is that the presence of immunity in survivors and how long that immunity might last has yet to be established, so it could all end in tears.

Which does not negate the fact that the WHO and most other countries have settled on 1m.

 

[Bantamzen]

I must admit I'm feeling a bit of that. Not because of the measures themselves, but that I have for a while been considering moving back "up north" and seem to feel less enthusiastic about that after these few months of being reasonably happy within range of (current) home. It's quite interesting thinking about it that way.

Never though of it that way .... but now I have and am inclined to agree with you.

I've been thinking about this a lot recently. Yesterday I found myself consciously wondering if I really wanted to take my turn shopping (my wife and I have been splitting shopping trips between us) and could I talk myself out of it. I didn't, but I felt a little shocked with myself considering that at the beginning of the crisis I would jump at the chance to get outside for an essential trip. And talking with friends I'm starting to hear that they too are finding themselves becoming hesitant about going out, some are even at the stage where it is causing them great anxiety.

I honestly think this is the net result of what I am now going to call Project Covid-Fear. The original messaging from the government to stay indoors or risk killing someone & if you went outside being less than 2m away from someone was an insta-death (again I know this wasn't technically the wording, but the inference was certainly there) contributed a lot towards this. But sitting here in the ever deepening bottom groove in my couch, the problem lies deeper than a lazy-arsed government just coming up with catchphrases rather than an adult approach to informing the public. The other day I found myself getting rather annoyed at the seemingly endless stream of adverts with stay-at-homers telling "their story". Similarly I had a rather heated exchange on social media with an acquaintance after they shouted at me for having posted a selfie on a walk because I "didn't wear my mask", to which I responded that I don't actually own a mask & when did owning a mask become compulsory. This led to a rather angry set of exchanges from a number of people.

It then occurred to me that perhaps the on top of the government's messaging, the constant stream of stay-at-homer adverts, the media constantly looking for lockdown-breakers to berate, buses / trains with swathes of hazard tape, and even just constant images of people wearing masks has in people's minds created this so-called "New Normal" (which from what I can see still has no absolute definition, which is rather concerning to say the least). Its why I think that we are now in the grip of a nation-wide epidemic of Stockholm Syndrome. And for this reason I honestly think that distancing measures should be brought to an end next month, partly because a great many people will want to self-regulate a 2m distance and so the risk of a second wave would be dramatically reduced, but also because we need something to help start to break the nation's fear of itself.

I know a lot of people won't agree, and frankly I don't expect it to happen rather the distance be reduced to 1m. But if we are to ever recover, we need to starting thinking about how we get people's minds out of fear & into confidence again.

 

[nedchester]

I've been thinking about this a lot recently. Yesterday I found myself consciously wondering if I really wanted to take my turn shopping (my wife and I have been splitting shopping trips between us) and could I talk myself out of it. I didn't, but I felt a little shocked with myself considering that at the beginning of the crisis I would jump at the chance to get outside for an essential trip. And talking with friends I'm starting to hear that they too are finding themselves becoming hesitant about going out, some are even at the stage where it is causing them great anxiety.

I honestly think this is the net result of what I am now going to call Project Covid-Fear. The original messaging from the government to stay indoors or risk killing someone & if you went outside being less than 2m away from someone was an insta-death (again I know this wasn't technically the wording, but the inference was certainly there) contributed a lot towards this. But sitting here in the ever deepening bottom groove in my couch, the problem lies deeper than a lazy-arsed government just coming up with catchphrases rather than an adult approach to informing the public. The other day I found myself getting rather annoyed at the seemingly endless stream of adverts with stay-at-homers telling "their story". Similarly I had a rather heated exchange on social media with an acquaintance after they shouted at me for having posted a selfie on a walk because I "didn't wear my mask", to which I responded that I don't actually own a mask & when did owning a mask become compulsory. This led to a rather angry set of exchanges from a number of people.

It then occurred to me that perhaps the on top of the government's messaging, the constant stream of stay-at-homer adverts, the media constantly looking for lockdown-breakers to berate, buses / trains with swathes of hazard tape, and even just constant images of people wearing masks has in people's minds created this so-called "New Normal" (which from what I can see still has no absolute definition, which is rather concerning to say the least). Its why I think that we are now in the grip of a nation-wide epidemic of Stockholm Syndrome. And for this reason I honestly think that distancing measures should be brought to an end next month, partly because a great many people will want to self-regulate a 2m distance and so the risk of a second wave would be dramatically reduced, but also because we need something to help start to break the nation's fear of itself.

I know a lot of people won't agree, and frankly I don't expect it to happen rather the distance be reduced to 1m. But if we are to ever recover, we need to starting thinking about how we get people's minds out of fear & into confidence again.

Can I just say that’s fantastic and is heading towards what I have been thinking in recent days. The adverts on the TV are especially grating.

My daughter had her friend from across the road round tonight. They sat in the back garden laughing and joking with each other. It was lovely but technically against the rules but I’m past caring.

We cannot go on like this. We cannot have people living in fear, scared to get close to strangers or even friends.

If the lockdown isn’t finished by July the population will decide for themselves so Johnson and his clowns are going to have to get something sorted.

It’s not good saying that “social distancing will have to go on for some time”. People won’t stand for it.

 

[The Ham]

Unfortunately the public, not to put too fine a point on it, are idiots. They've been so scared by the government's over the top "stay at home, save lives" message that a significant proportion of people think that the minute they leave their homes they will instantly catch the virus and die! In reality of course the actual chances of catching the virus, particularly outdoors, is so minimal as to be insignificant, however much the lockdown enthusiasts on so many internet forums may tell you otherwise.

With the number of infections and deaths falling constantly over recent days, I would be very surprised if the current lockdown measures are extended beyond the next review in around a week's time.

The problem with people being idiots is that it works both ways.

Nor only did it mean that people blindly follow rules, but other people ignore those rules when it's for their own good.

Take speeding as an example, some will not go faster than the limit, whilst others are happy going at 50 in a 30 (even though a car doing 50 would still be going at 44 by the time a car doing 30 would have stopped).

As such there's probably a good case for arguing that 2m is a good "rule" for getting the infection rate down.

Now that the R value is generally accepted to be below 1 then there's a good argument for some relaxation to this. However what that looks like will depend on various factors and will change depending on who you ask.

 

[The Ham]

There is a slight problem with any of this.

I reckon a majority of the population couldn’t tell you how long a metre is, to within 50%. My degree educated wife, when tested on the subject, failed dismally.

Obviously this forum understands these things better.

Due to my work I'd suggest that I'm better than average, however I do agree that the average person is still going to either under/over estimate, as such suggesting 6 foot (which is 1.8m) or 2m rather than 1m gives a good margin of error. As such during a time when infection rates are high (and there's likely to be large regional variations on this, so what might be fine for one area might cause problems in an area with a higher number of infections).

 

[Andy Pacer]

I've noticed when queuing for/in supermarkets recently that people tend to observe the social distancing when inside the shops (where possible) but seem to forget about it when queuing. Maybe people think if you are looking at someone's back then its safer!

 

[Bantamzen]

.

Can I just say that’s fantastic and is heading towards what I have been thinking in recent days. The adverts on the TV are especially grating.

My daughter had her friend from across the road round tonight. They sat in the back garden laughing and joking with each other. It was lovely but technically against the rules but I’m past caring.

We cannot go on like this. We cannot have people living in fear, scared to get close to strangers or even friends.

If the lockdown isn’t finished by July the population will decide for themselves so Johnson and his clowns are going to have to get something sorted.

It’s not good saying that “social distancing will have to go on for some time”. People won’t stand for it.

Thanks, as a big fan of George Orwell & in particular Nineteen Eighty Four, I see some disturbing parallels between art and real life. Indeed whilst studying English Literature at 'O' Level I wrote a paper on it, putting myself in the position of Big Brother and describing what I would do. I recently looked at that (I kept it because I got a A++ and a note from the teacher hoping I would never become a dictator!) & some of the main points I set out are almost being replicated today, including something I called "New Thinking" which was an expansion on "Newspeak" & "Doublethinking" from the book. This was a kind of attrition that instead of using the threat of war & violence to repress, used more subliminal imagery, appearing to be delivering positive messaging but with oppressive undertones. So when I heard the term "New Normal", my blood ran cold. Its almost as if Orwell is reaching out from the beyond in search of a title to follow up on the original book.

Fear & suspicion are powerful weapons in the wrong hands, Orwell knew this and this was central to the plot. His writings were a warning not to let them control us, yet this is exactly what we are starting to see. The government messaging along with the media obsession with the "New Normal" is clearly acting on the collective psyche of the nation, and not in a good way. As you rightly say, distancing can not continue for much longer. Rightly or wrongly we are going to have to get used to the notion that we are mortal, and vulnerable. We should not, nay must not sign away our physical & mental freedom in trade for a faux sense of security. That's not to say we should not learn from this, there are lots of things to take away and think about such as how we work in the future, maybe spreading the traditional 9-5, Monday-Friday week out, meaning that distancing on public transport becomes more organic. But we absolutely must not let how we have handled covid in the year 2020 become precedent.

For anyone that has read the book, I would urge you to think about it & what is happening today. For those that have not, I highly recommend it!

 

[Snow1964]

Now that the R rate is below 1 (and I hear that in London it is probably below 0.3) then it is clear that social distancing is easing unofficially.

Yes people still queue for shops, but once inside seem to cut the distance considerably, so decreasing anyway

There now seems to be a new fear culture. Can’t go to work or child can’t restart school etc just in case. Really the Government needs to stop handouts discouraging it. I know of teachers that have not done online lessons, but are treating it as holiday on full pay.

The latest locally is cannot reopen a school without a risk assessment, but that will be selective, obviously won’t show zero, maybe higher than alternative, but is acceptable excuse. Let’s be real, there are about 10m school children and 3 under 15s have died (all of which may have had other health issues). The risk is not children.

So where is the risk ?
As I understand it, the virus causes problems with lungs absorbing oxygen and then red blood cells carrying oxygen, so those with faulty filters (liver, kidneys, spleen etc) have problems. The body realises this and increases the red blood cell count to help carry the oxygen (which is why the red cell count is high in many victims). But the NHS does not do routine health screening of blood (so cannot identify who is likely to get it badly). Hence the clumsy 2m rule and blunt higher isolation if age over 70 rule

So the 2m rule is arbitrary, a bit of space, but much less than 5m of a cough, or 8m of a sneeze. So of course it can be changed.

 

[Andy Pacer]

And whatever anyone says, I dont see how there can always be a hard and fast rule distance wise, even outdoors. It surely depends on conditions, weather (I.e. wind etc).

 

[The Ham]

Yep have to agree. 1 meter from June 1st. If that goes swimmingly - then revisit and no social distancing apart from common sense from August 1st. If there is a resurgence in flu season revisit again. It is a fluid situation

Given that schools are effectively trialling bubbles (a class of up to 15 with no interaction with other classes, and only in one setting, so either a childminder or at school but not both) from the 1st of June of suggest that using a similar bubbles system could allow life to return to normal fairly quickly.

Up to now it's been one bubble we've been in (i.e. our home), or maybe two if you work with a small group of others.

Give guidance that you should try and maintain 1m from those within your bubbles (except your primary bubble) and 2m from other bubbles.

Over time you increase the number of bubbles which people can interact with.

By doing so this helps with track and trace as you've only got limited numbers of people who you have to trace. It also limits the risk to companies who may find a single bubble need to be away from work for two weeks. This would be significantly better than a whole company being closed down from a single person testing positive.

Public transport is likely to be an abnormal thing, so it wouldn't count as a bubble but would allow people who aren't talking or face to face to be within 1m.

Likewise you could, as long as the R value is low, apply a similar rule for pubs. Although it would be good to have "fire breaks" so that there's no more than (say) 6 tables which are within 2m of each other before there is the then a clear 2m zone. That would allow smaller pubs to open without cutting the capacity too much.

Technology could then help (with the tracing app and/checking in/out with pub apps) with the tracing of new cases.

With regards to a date, let's give the going back to schools a few weeks to see how that works out and then scale up from there.

If things don't work out well then it's not too much change to put in measures to limit the spread (probably closing of a few schools for a few weeks, so easy to fine tune of needed), once people are used to going to the pub is going to be hard to get them to scale back from that if that's too fast and the infection rate jumps again.

 

[yorksrob]

Thanks, as a big fan of George Orwell & in particular Nineteen Eighty Four, I see some disturbing parallels between art and real life. Indeed whilst studying English Literature at 'O' Level I wrote a paper on it, putting myself in the position of Big Brother and describing what I would do. I recently looked at that (I kept it because I got a A++ and a note from the teacher hoping I would never become a dictator!) & some of the main points I set out are almost being replicated today, including something I called "New Thinking" which was an expansion on "Newspeak" & "Doublethinking" from the book. This was a kind of attrition that instead of using the threat of war & violence to repress, used more subliminal imagery, appearing to be delivering positive messaging but with oppressive undertones. So when I heard the term "New Normal", my blood ran cold. Its almost as if Orwell is reaching out from the beyond in search of a title to follow up on the original book.

Fear & suspicion are powerful weapons in the wrong hands, Orwell knew this and this was central to the plot. His writings were a warning not to let them control us, yet this is exactly what we are starting to see. The government messaging along with the media obsession with the "New Normal" is clearly acting on the collective psyche of the nation, and not in a good way. As you rightly say, distancing can not continue for much longer. Rightly or wrongly we are going to have to get used to the notion that we are mortal, and vulnerable. We should not, nay must not sign away our physical & mental freedom in trade for a faux sense of security. That's not to say we should not learn from this, there are lots of things to take away and think about such as how we work in the future, maybe spreading the traditional 9-5, Monday-Friday week out, meaning that distancing on public transport becomes more organic. But we absolutely must not let how we have handled covid in the year 2020 become precedent.

For anyone that has read the book, I would urge you to think about it & what is happening today. For those that have not, I highly recommend it!

I do find the phrase "the new normal" sinister and particularly irritating.

I'm also tired of "lockdown" adverts with people on zoom etc. It's enough to make you want the online gambling adverts back.

 

[Andy Pacer]

I do find the phrase "the new normal" sinister and particularly irritating.

Funny how they never try and be positive and make any reference to "the old normal" even for things that could effectively go back to "normal".

 

[yorksrob]

Funny how they never try and be positive and make any reference to "the old normal" even for things that could effectively go back to "normal".

Indeed. Particularly as "the old normal" is effectively the product of thousands of years of human evolution, so I expect we'll be heading back to it at some stage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've been thinking about this a lot recently. Yesterday I found myself consciously wondering if I really wanted to take my turn shopping (my wife and I have been splitting shopping trips between us) and could I talk myself out of it. I didn't, but I felt a little shocked with myself considering that at the beginning of the crisis I would jump at the chance to get outside for an essential trip. And talking with friends I'm starting to hear that they too are finding themselves becoming hesitant about going out, some are even at the stage where it is causing them great anxiety.

I've been actively avoiding shops, but that is not because of anything to do with catching COVID (though for the week at the start it was because I was self isolating in case I had it, as I had some suspicious symptoms, so I've been in lockdown one week more than most). It's because the experience at present is just grim - long queues and people giving you evils/bad mouthing you if you go back for something you've forgotten. To be fair I hate shopping passionately in all its forms (other than online) anyway.

With regard to others, though, I have noticed that one thing unusual is happening here - people are villifying others for putting themselves at risk (and this is the wording you often see, not for the risk of spreading to others which is valid). Yet you would never see such sanctimonious behaviour if someone posted showing off about, for example, going rock climbing or doing a parachute jump - you'd more get "wow, I wouldn't have the guts to do that" or somesuch.

What I've observed, though (and I'd love to see stats on it) is that what we seem to have done is accidentally engineered what we couldn't do deliberately - to unlock younger people while keeping older people safe, give or take the spike in people in their 30s being scared of it. Kids, teenagers and twentysomethings are out with their mates here as if nothing has happened, and most notably a local pub whose beer garden doesn't have a fence around it is being used as a pub again, with people buying the drink from the adjacent shop instead (at a far lower price, and a slightly shorter walk to the "bar"). I wonder is this happening elsewhere?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed. Particularly as "the old normal" is effectively the product of thousands of years of human evolution, so I expect we'll be heading back to it at some stage.

I think what we will end up with is having effectively advanced the communication side of tech by between 5-10 years - that is, the home working genie won't go back in the bottle (and that could cause some evening of house prices as people in the SE realise they don't have to live there any more and move somewhere cheaper and nicer, and those SE jobs become available remotely to people elsewhere too), and there may well be a "bonfire of the chain stores" as people buy online instead (and provided people find alternative work I can't really see anything all that bad in either of those two things). Other than that, yes, I'd expect most of the "old normal" to return.

 

[yorkie]

I know a lot of people won't agree, and frankly I don't expect it to happen rather the distance be reduced to 1m. But if we are to ever recover, we need to starting thinking about how we get people's minds out of fear & into confidence again.

A lot of the vocal minority won't agree, for sure, but I think that on this forum a lot of people will agree! I've made a dedicated thread to discuss this: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/coronavirus-how-scared-should-we-be.204710/

(Also I am finding the results so far of this poll to be encouraging: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/is-it-time-to-relax-the-2m-social-distancing-guideline-who-guidance-is-1m.204256/)

 

[yorksrob]

I think what we will end up with is having effectively advanced the communication side of tech by between 5-10 years - that is, the home working genie won't go back in the bottle (and that could cause some evening of house prices as people in the SE realise they don't have to live there any more and move somewhere cheaper and nicer, and those SE jobs become available remotely to people elsewhere too), and there may well be a "bonfire of the chain stores" as people buy online instead (and provided people find alternative work I can't really see anything all that bad in either of those two things). Other than that, yes, I'd expect most of the "old normal" to return.

I think you're right about both, however there are also limits to both. I'm already quite bored of my own kichen.

 

[Bantamzen]

I do find the phrase "the new normal" sinister and particularly irritating.

I'm also tired of "lockdown" adverts with people on zoom etc. It's enough to make you want the online gambling adverts back.

To me its sinister in that it has no clear definition, but folk out there are already chanting the "new normal" mantra. Its effectively a blank cheque for the government to apply social restrictions as it pleases, just so long as the phrase is used to justify it.

Funny how they never try and be positive and make any reference to "the old normal" even for things that could effectively go back to "normal".

I am trying hard not to let the cynical side of my mind make me believe that there is some deliberate social engineering going on here. I'm trying, but my thoughts keep coming back to the dictator-in-waiting Dominic Cummings. I keep getting the image of him thumbing through his copy of Nineteen Eighty Four, and shouting "Boris! I've got an idea for your next policy set...."

I've been actively avoiding shops, but that is not because of anything to do with catching COVID (though for the week at the start it was because I was self isolating in case I had it, as I had some suspicious symptoms, so I've been in lockdown one week more than most). It's because the experience at present is just grim - long queues and people giving you evils/bad mouthing you if you go back for something you've forgotten. To be fair I hate shopping passionately in all its forms (other than online) anyway.

I'm no great lover of shopping myself, but I was actually quite enjoying a change of scene up until recently.

With regard to others, though, I have noticed that one thing unusual is happening here - people are villifying others for putting themselves at risk (and this is the wording you often see, not for the risk of spreading to others which is valid). Yet you would never see such sanctimonious behaviour if someone posted showing off about, for example, going rock climbing or doing a parachute jump - you'd more get "wow, I wouldn't have the guts to do that" or somesuch.

I'm pretty certain that when some people vilify others for putting "others" at risk, what they mean to say is putting "them" at risk. This is a worrying sign that people, at least some are starting to see other people as little more than infection vectors.

What I've observed, though (and I'd love to see stats on it) is that what we seem to have done is accidentally engineered what we couldn't do deliberately - to unlock younger people while keeping older people safe, give or take the spike in people in their 30s being scared of it. Kids, teenagers and twentysomethings are out with their mates here as if nothing has happened, and most notably a local pub whose beer garden doesn't have a fence around it is being used as a pub again, with people buying the drink from the adjacent shop instead (at a far lower price, and a slightly shorter walk to the "bar"). I wonder is this happening elsewhere?

I haven't seen much of that here, in fact walking home from the local Co-op is still quiet an eerie experience with very few people or cars about compared to pre-covid, and not even the sound of kids playing out in their gardens. And judging by some of the local social media groups this is probably not a surprised as many around here are in that 30-something group, and seem grimly determined to hide their entire families away until the every single occupant of the globe has been vaccinated. Still it does have a positive, once the pubs open again it won't be hard to get a table....

I think what we will end up with is having effectively advanced the communication side of tech by between 5-10 years - that is, the home working genie won't go back in the bottle (and that could cause some evening of house prices as people in the SE realise they don't have to live there any more and move somewhere cheaper and nicer, and those SE jobs become available remotely to people elsewhere too), and there may well be a "bonfire of the chain stores" as people buy online instead (and provided people find alternative work I can't really see anything all that bad in either of those two things). Other than that, yes, I'd expect most of the "old normal" to return.

Home / flexible working is definitely the way forward in the long run. New Zealand seem to be at least thinking in the right direction, with suggestions of a 4 day week. I'd happily stick in extra hours over 4 days to get an extra day of leisure.

 

[NorthOxonian]

(Also I am finding the results so far of this poll to be encouraging: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/is-it-time-to-relax-the-2m-social-distancing-guideline-who-guidance-is-1m.204256/)

I voted for a more "conservative" option in that poll, but don't take that as support for long term social distancing - I'd personally keep 2m until July but look to abolish it entirely then.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Thanks, as a big fan of George Orwell & in particular Nineteen Eighty Four, I see some disturbing parallels between art and real life. Indeed whilst studying English Literature at 'O' Level I wrote a paper on it, putting myself in the position of Big Brother and describing what I would do. I recently looked at that (I kept it because I got a A++ and a note from the teacher hoping I would never become a dictator!) & some of the main points I set out are almost being replicated today, including something I called "New Thinking" which was an expansion on "Newspeak" & "Doublethinking" from the book. This was a kind of attrition that instead of using the threat of war & violence to repress, used more subliminal imagery, appearing to be delivering positive messaging but with oppressive undertones. So when I heard the term "New Normal", my blood ran cold. Its almost as if Orwell is reaching out from the beyond in search of a title to follow up on the original book.

Fear & suspicion are powerful weapons in the wrong hands, Orwell knew this and this was central to the plot. His writings were a warning not to let them control us, yet this is exactly what we are starting to see. The government messaging along with the media obsession with the "New Normal" is clearly acting on the collective psyche of the nation, and not in a good way. As you rightly say, distancing can not continue for much longer. Rightly or wrongly we are going to have to get used to the notion that we are mortal, and vulnerable. We should not, nay must not sign away our physical & mental freedom in trade for a faux sense of security. That's not to say we should not learn from this, there are lots of things to take away and think about such as how we work in the future, maybe spreading the traditional 9-5, Monday-Friday week out, meaning that distancing on public transport becomes more organic. But we absolutely must not let how we have handled covid in the year 2020 become precedent.

For anyone that has read the book, I would urge you to think about it & what is happening today. For those that have not, I highly recommend it!

Excellent post and well done. Ironically been reading Orwell's biography. AAA+

 

[Andy Pacer]

I voted for a more "conservative" option in that poll, but don't take that as support for long term social distancing - I'd personally keep 2m until July but look to abolish it entirely then.

Reality will have to set in at some point!