• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Why is there in practice no distancing in most shops/cafes?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I didn't doubt that your solution would be more restrictions and / or enforcement - it always is!

Well, I'd prefer that people rather than trying to work out the minimum they could do to comply with the letter of the law took the time to understand the ethos of it and what we are trying to achieve and took the right measures without any enforcement needed, but demonstrably the typical British person is too selfish and inconsiderate to do that, so what else are we left with?

It will only work if we all sing from the same hymn sheet. On a Zoom call of course - singing is a good spread vector! :D
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
Well, I'd prefer that people rather than trying to work out the minimum they could do to comply with the letter of the law took the time to understand the ethos of it and what we are trying to achieve and took the right measures without any enforcement needed, but demonstrably the typical British person is too selfish and inconsiderate to do that, so what else are we left with?

It will only work if we all sing from the same hymn sheet. On a Zoom call of course - singing is a good spread vector! :D

I spent a lot of time travelling around on Monday, and one thing I noticed was there's a certain demographic who are making little to no effort to comply with any of the legislation / guidance, and I'd guarantee these would be the first ones to complain on Facebook if they or their family suffered because the NHS was unable to cope. I don't think it's too much to ask that if you choose to travel by train / pop in to Asda / go to the pub that you observe the relevant guidance. I'm unsure whether stricter enforcement would work though, the last thing we need right now is rioting and mass protests
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I think this is the case - wasn't there a report a few weeks ago that said the concern was wearing masks would get people thinking they didn't need to social distance?

The whole point of masks is to mitigate risk in situations where social distancing might not be possible.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The whole point of masks is to mitigate risk in situations where social distancing might not be possible.

Where it might not be possible. Not where you can't be bothered to do it.

I think some people are having trouble with this distinction, which is what gave rise to this thread.
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Where it might not be possible. Not where you can't be bothered to do it.

I think some people are having trouble with this distinction, which is what gave rise to this thread.

It suggests to me that you need one or the other, not both.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It suggests to me that you need one or the other, not both.

In practice it doesn't work like that. Supermarkets may still operate 2m distancing measures, but you cannot be 100% sure to be 2m from people 100% of the time. Therefore you wear a mask as well, so as to mitigate those situations when they occur. And if you see someone who is not wearing one, probably because they are exempt, you and they need to make special effort to keep the 2m at all times, i.e. don't pass them face to face without turning away, for example, because they are unable to make use of that extra mitigation.

It requires thought, which many of the British public find hard.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
The whole point of masks is to mitigate risk in situations where social distancing might not be possible.

Indeed but I believe the report was saying people would think face coverings would replace social distancing as appears to be the case
 

Huntergreed

Established Member
Associate Staff
Events Co-ordinator
Joined
16 Jan 2016
Messages
3,019
Location
Dumfries
Let's see what the WHO have to say on it:

Masks should be used as part of a comprehensive strategy of measures to suppress transmission and save lives; the use of a mask alone is not sufficient to provide an adequate level of protection against COVID-19. You should also maintain a minimum physical distance of at least 1 metre from others, frequently clean your hands and avoid touching your face and mask.

Medical masks can protect people wearing the mask from getting infected, as well as can prevent those who have symptoms from spreading them. WHO recommends the following groups use medical masks.

  • Health workers
  • Anyone with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, including people with mild symptoms
  • People caring for suspect or confirmed cases of COVID-19 outside of health facilities
Medical masks are also recommended for these at-risk people, when they are in areas of widespread transmission and they cannot guarantee a distance of at least 1 metre from others:

  • People aged 60 or over
  • People of any age with underlying health conditions


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.

(https://www.who.int/emergencies/dis...wers-hub/q-a-detail/q-a-on-covid-19-and-masks)

Note that it's not about keeping 2m apart, but 1m. The 2m thing was, and still is, the government overreacting/trying to look 'safer' than they need to.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
Let's see what the WHO have to say on it:



(https://www.who.int/emergencies/dis...wers-hub/q-a-detail/q-a-on-covid-19-and-masks)

Note that it's not about keeping 2m apart, but 1m. The 2m thing was, and still is, the government overreacting/trying to look 'safer' than they need to.

The problem is there's many people who arent even keeping 1m apart. The other day I was queuing to get in to the co-op and the old bid behind was stood side on next to me so close that when she moved her arm she made contact. Its coverings and 1m+ distancing, not one or the other
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
In practice it doesn't work like that. Supermarkets may still operate 2m distancing measures, but you cannot be 100% sure to be 2m from people 100% of the time. Therefore you wear a mask as well, so as to mitigate those situations when they occur. And if you see someone who is not wearing one, probably because they are exempt, you and they need to make special effort to keep the 2m at all times, i.e. don't pass them face to face without turning away, for example, because they are unable to make use of that extra mitigation.

It requires thought, which many of the British public find hard.
Indeed but I believe the report was saying people would think face coverings would replace social distancing as appears to be the case

The problem is that if you start putting in peoples minds that you need both, you end up negating the message that it's possible to do those things where it isn't possible to socially distance.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
People do seem to be doing that, which could well be the cause of the increase in cases, so we need to push them not to.

Although Gmt seems to think that the rise in cases is due to people living/socialising in the same household or large groups of people socialising together. In these circumstances people are likely doing neither social distancing nor face coverings.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The problem is there's many people who arent even keeping 1m apart. The other day I was queuing to get in to the co-op and the old bid behind was stood side on next to me so close that when she moved her arm she made contact. Its coverings and 1m+ distancing, not one or the other

In the coffee shop I discussed in the initial post, the staff, not wearing masks or visors, were not even 0.5m apart.

Although Gmt seems to think that the rise in cases is due to people living/socialising in the same household or large groups of people socialising together. In these circumstances people are likely doing neither social distancing nor face coverings.

That's the most visible cause at the moment, yes, it doesn't mean others are not having an effect.

The problem is that if you start putting in peoples minds that you need both, you end up negating the message that it's possible to do those things where it isn't possible to socially distance.

This is why we need to get the collectivist idea through peoples' Thatcher-influenced individualist skulls. It's not about personal risk to them, and it's not really about personal risk to the person they're walking past either. It's about society as a whole and the economy, which means, as a collective, we need to take every practical option to reduce spread in order that we can still do the things where it isn't practical. It's the overall numbers of cases and deaths that matter, not individuals.

We also need to stop ridiculing the Government with stuff like "Matt Hancock says you can meet but only where there's a till". You cannot pretend the economy is unimportant - it's very important - if it fully collapses people won't be able to eat. So yes, it is more important that you meet, distanced, at a coffee shop, pub or whatever than in your Nan's back garden.
 

northernchris

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2011
Messages
1,509
We also need to stop ridiculing the Government with stuff like "Matt Hancock says you can meet but only where there's a till". You cannot pretend the economy is unimportant - it's very important - if it fully collapses people won't be able to eat. So yes, it is more important that you meet, distanced, at a coffee shop, pub or whatever than in your Nan's back garden.

Yes, those comments are unhelpful and no doubt fuelled by agenda rather than looking at the bigger picture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top