---

Keep Your Distance: Is Two Metres Too Far Or Not Far Enough?

Whilst the TV and print news media is, by Government leaking prompts, pressurising the Government and the public to accept reduction in the social-distancing rules; many scientists are examining the facts around the social impact of virus infection rates and whether or not it actually matters.

Included in the ever changing Covid-19 advice from a Government whose true motivation some question as being profit orientated as apposed to being science based and public health orientated, is the issue of the wearing face-masks when outside one's homes. Looking at the habits of the public on wearing these, it is quite clear that common sense does not often prevail amongst those members of the public wearing them!

However, that is a subject for another discussion. Right now the issue is one of sociaL distancing whilst not wearing face coverings.

Whilst common-sense dictates that as the virus is spread via tiny droplets being projected into the air from the mouths and noses of those carrying or suffering from the Covid-19 virus and traveling; we then need to assume a safe distance from being at risk of this being breathed in by those in close contact with such individuals.

But what is meant by a safe distance?

In a newly published commentary, safety experts conclude the arguments for a blanket reduction of the two metres social distancing guidance do not stack up.

“The arguments for a blanket reduction of 2m in the UK economy do not stack up. A limited but growing body of scientific evidence, based on a better understanding of particle physics and aerosols and supplemented by case studies of very recent clusters, continues to support a precautionary approach to 2m and its continuation in many settings where public and worker safety is at risk and there are no effective alternatives and no vaccines. The science for lowering the 2m distance, however, appears to be limited if not absent at this stage.”

KEEP YOUR DISTANCE: Is two metres too far or not far enough to protect from COVID-19 and who benefits and who loses if it is reduced ?

The Commentary by Andrew Watterson, Rory O’Neill, Janet Newsham, Hilda Palmer published yesterday, June 22nd 2020; can be downloaded now from the Unionsafety E-Library here, by using searchword 'SocDis' or selecting the category 'Infectious Diseases / Pandemic'

Source: Hazards

Designed, Hosted and Maintained by Union Safety Services