# Easing several lockdown rules at once could boost virus, say UK scientists



## Northerner (Jun 23, 2020)

The easing of multiple lockdown measures in England at once risks Covid-19 gaining a fresh foothold, scientists advising the government have warned.

They raised concerns over the halving of the 2-metre physical distancing rule at the same time as reopening venues, saying the country was currently experiencing up to 4,300 Covid-19 infections a day and had no effective digital track-and-trace system, while highlighting research that showed transmission of the virus was more likely to happen indoors.

On Monday, it was announced that millions of people with underlying health issues would be permitted to leave their homes and mix with groups from 6 July, for the first time in three months.

On Tuesday Boris Johnson gave venues from museums to pubs to hairdressers the green light to reopen from 4 July, halved physical distancing from 2 metres to 1 metre and said two households could meet up indoors, both also from 4 July.

Acknowledging the relief many would feel – the Daily Express headline on Tuesday was “Freedom pass for millions” – Johnson called it the end of a “long national hibernation”. However, scientists made clear that it came with risk.









						Coronavirus: easing several lockdown rules at once could boost virus, say UK scientists
					

Sage advisers warn halving 2-metre distancing rule and reopening venues brings risks




					www.theguardian.com
				




Must admit I was quite surprised (maybe I shouldn't have been!) at the extent to which measures will be lifted - there seems to be very little that remains of the lockdown  Introducing so many avenues for possible infections will surely make it difficult to pinpoint the major contributor to any new wave


----------



## Deleted member 27171 (Jun 23, 2020)

Northerner said:


> Must admit I was quite surprised (maybe I shouldn't have been!) at the extent to which measures will be lifted - there seems to be very little that remains of the lockdown  Introducing so many avenues for possible infections will surely make it difficult to pinpoint the major contributor to any new wave



I was shocked by the amount of measures reduced too. What remains closed? Offices and gyms? Don’t get me wrong I’m gagging for a hair cut but seems a bit off kilter that someone can literally rub my head and blow whatever germs are lurking in the air around a room full of people with a hairdryer, but people cant sit 2 metres apart in a work environment - unless they work in schools or shops of course.


----------



## Northerner (Jun 23, 2020)

I found all the combinations of who could meet who, how many and where especially confusing - a bit like a Ted Rogers riddle from 3-2-1, back in the days of Dusty Bin (for those old enough to remember that!)


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 23, 2020)

LucyDUK said:


> What remains closed?



Swimming pools and some thing like nail bars (which seem similar to hairdressers to me). Theatres and so on can open but can't actually be theatres (no live performances). Nightclubs, dance studios. People who can work from home are still encouraged to do so.

(Robert Peston has been emphasising that model villages are allowed to open.)

I hope the ONS is able to increase their sampling so we get a good picture of what's happening. With any luck the incidence will continue to fall; the weather's good, for one thing.


----------



## Sally71 (Jun 23, 2020)

Well it's not rocket science, is it.  Of course if people are suddenly allowed to go out again and visit places then it will increase the risk. On one hand it's great that things are starting to open up again, to be honest though if pubs and hairdressers and cinemas are allowed to open again then I don’t see why other places can’t (easier to maintain social distancing with a small number of people in a dance studio than with a hairdresser having to touch you!).  On the other, I can’t help thinking it's too soon   Much as I have missed being able to go out and do a bit of shopping, have lunch and then maybe go and see a film, I won't be rushing out to do so just yet.  Especially if I have to queue for the privilege


----------



## Docb (Jun 23, 2020)

For the first time I have become very uneasy about coronavirus and the prospects for the future.  It seems to me that the effect of today's decisions in effect will sacrifice a few for the benefit of the many.  Unusual for a conservative government who usually sacrifice many for the benefit of the few.

The scientific opinion seems to say that an increase in COVID infections will arise from today's changes if the rules are not obeyed absolutely by everybody, and that is not going to happen. This means that a minimum of a couple of hundred deaths a day and goodness knows how many debilitated by the disease has been set as an acceptable penalty to pay in order to prevent a total collapse of UK the UK economy.

Maybe a sensible strategy, maybe not.  What is certain is that we are all on our own, especially so if you are 70+, male and have pre-existing conditions.  So take care.

Apologies if this sounds a bit depressing but even I cannot see a way of putting a positive spin on it.


----------



## trophywench (Jun 23, 2020)

No - hairdressing is normally done from behind you, and they use the mirror to ask things like how much do you want cut off holding a 'slice' of hair at right angles from you head and any conversation takes place via the same mirror, not face to face  whereas nails are normally done face to face!

I think the granddaughter that does my hair has been told they have to wear masks at work anyway.


----------



## trophywench (Jun 23, 2020)

We're both happy to wait until August to see how it goes, before deciding if we want to venture back out into the world, thanks.


----------



## Ljc (Jun 23, 2020)

trophywench said:


> We're both happy to wait until August to see how it goes, before deciding if we want to venture back out into the world, thanks.


Ditto. 

I don’t know if it will work I can only hope, I’ve ordered a replacement notice to go on our front door asking people to stand two metres away. , my last Asada delivery driver couldn’t have got any closer if he tried.


----------



## atoll (Jun 24, 2020)

fourth of july.....no particular significance with that date is there?
pandemic is over peoples,so we can get brexit done.
wealth before health.


----------



## Robin (Jun 24, 2020)

atoll said:


> fourth of july.....no particular significance with that date is there?
> pandemic is over peoples,so we can get brexit done.
> wealth before health.


Lockdown is costing lives too. Not so much wealth over health, but for some, especially the elderly, choosing whether you die of Covid or isolation.


----------



## grovesy (Jun 24, 2020)

Sports Massgae Therapists are up in arms as they seem to be been lumped together with Massage Parlours and not been able to reopen. Mine who I see at my Chiropractor's Surgery , has premises elsewhere, and had put plans in place to restart.


----------



## Northerner (Jun 24, 2020)

There was an email on the TV earlier from someone who ran a dance studio. As he said. he has lots of space and it would be easy to separate people sufficiently to reduce risk. Hew also said that his studio is above a pub which, with the same floor space, will have much less room because of the bar, tables, chairs etc., so it seems wrong that they can be open and he can't  My niece runs a dance school and is in the same boat  She's had no financial support because like a lot of small companies she pays herself via dividends. OK, it means she pays less tax that way, but point me at a member of the government who doesn't deprive the government of considerably greater funds through tax dodges etc.


----------



## Thebearcametoo (Jun 24, 2020)

The messaging on it is so vague that people will hear ‘1m plus‘ and just take it as 1m not 1m PLUS a mask, screen or other safety measures. And given how people think 2m is the length of their arm to begin with it’s going to mean effectively no social distancing.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 24, 2020)

Northerner said:


> There was an email on the TV earlier from someone who ran a dance studio. As he said. he has lots of space and it would be easy to separate people sufficiently to reduce risk. Hew also said that his studio is above a pub which, with the same floor space, will have much less room because of the bar, tables, chairs etc., so it seems wrong that they can be open and he can't  My niece runs a dance school and is in the same boat



Dancing tends to involve exertion (so increased breathing, etc.) which probably makes that much worse. (Unfortunately.)


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 24, 2020)

I just wonder what will happen at the borders with Wales and Scotland, where this easing won’t be happening just yet. Close the borders?


----------



## grovesy (Jun 24, 2020)

Thebearcametoo said:


> The messaging on it is so vague that people will hear ‘1m plus‘ and just take it as 1m not 1m PLUS a mask, screen or other safety measures. And given how people think 2m is the length of their arm to begin with it’s going to mean effectively no social distancing.


Professor Whitty was emphasising that point at  the press conference.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jun 24, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> Dancing tends to involve exertion (so increased breathing, etc.) which probably makes that much worse. (Unfortunately.)



That's been the rationale here for delayed restart of dance classes, and it makes sense. It's not so clear to me why bars with restrictions on number of people in them are more OK, but the ostensible rationale seems to be that they're OK if people remain seated and don't move around and mingle in standing groups, gabbing in each others' faces.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 24, 2020)

Eddy Edson said:


> It's not so clear to me why bars with restrictions on number of people in them are more OK, but the ostensible rationale seems to be that they're OK if people remain seated and don't move around and mingle in standing groups, gabbing in each others' faces.



I haven't looked to see if there are restrictions on music volume, but if there aren't then there should be. I think (in England) the recommendation is for people to be seated (at a booked table) rather than moving around too much. Altogether not much like a pub.


----------



## Flower (Jun 24, 2020)

I was alarmed at how much was relaxed yesterday. It hasn't changed my fear level at all, I’m avoiding people and places as much as ever. I’m not dying to go to the shops or for a coffee.


----------



## Robin (Jun 24, 2020)

I’m feeling relaxed while West Oxfordshire is continuing to report no new cases, but the minute the figures start to go up, I’m scuttling back indoors.
Especially in a couple of weeks time when the second homers are allowed to arrive again.


----------



## Northerner (Jun 24, 2020)

Robin said:


> I’m feeling relaxed while West Oxfordshire is continuing to report no new cases, but the minute the figures start to go up, I’m scuttling back indoors.
> Especially in a couple of weeks time when the second homers are allowed to arrive again.


The Coop shop assistant told me that no-one had died in Harrogate for 3 days - wasn't sure whether to be reassured or not!


----------



## nonethewiser (Jun 24, 2020)

Prof Chris Whitty thinks Covid could be around another year, question is will there ever be good time to open places back up?

What will be will be so need to see if right decision was made, personally think its good move to reopen businesses slowly rather than altogether.


----------



## grovesy (Jun 24, 2020)

nonethewiser said:


> Prof Chris Whitty thinks Covid could be around another year, question is will there ever be good time to open places back up?
> 
> What will be will be so need to see if right decision was made, personally think its good move to reopen businesses slowly rather than altogether.


He has been saying this from the beginning as has Dr.Fauci in the US.


----------



## Keith McMillan (Jun 24, 2020)

The real possibility of a back to work call from my employer in July is causing anxiety and sleep loss. It's too early in my opinion whilst contagion is still a real possibility. Four years to retirement and I don't wan't to miss it! I could take it early and live under the minimum wage I suppose. Maybe find contract work to supplement it, but right now it will have to be WFH or outdoor remote working and we have major unemployment.

Maybe this is wrong but if 1 in 2000 people are carriers right now and I work with 200 people, I will have a 1 in 10 chance of working in the same building as someone with covid?

I'm hoping covid will be reduced like measles but there is a jab for that and we don't even have an app for covid. Boris wanted to save a few quid by not hiring major players to create the app I hear and then it went bits up.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 24, 2020)

Keith McMillan said:


> Maybe this is wrong but if 1 in 2000 people are carriers right now and I work with 200 people, I will have a 1 in 10 chance of working in the same building as someone with covid?



Yes, that's about right I believe. (And with 1 in 1700 it's more like 12%.) Employers are supposed to make suitable plans to mitigate risks, one of which might be "bubbles" (as intended in universities and schools) where you might only actually interact with a few employees. (I work at an office with 30 or 40, but I only really get within ~5m of a few of them even when the office was open.)


----------



## Keith McMillan (Jun 25, 2020)

Thanks for confirming that Bruce. I'm better at using this statistic than the 25% outcome the BBC gave out recently. 
I help others at the desk side as part of my job. It can't all be done remotely. I also share a broom cupboard with two others all three of us have coughing and sneezing issues. 

I know Boris wants us back and he doesn't seem so particular about protecting vulnerable people now, and yet we have a 1 in 1700 chance of being near an infected person. My employer wants something from my doctor if I won't go back when/if asked. 

I don't know what document a doctor can give my employer to help me isolate further. I would like to know what the organisation thinks is a reasonable value of infection rate for a diabetic to go back into work to, rub shoulders, and be reasonably safe. My work like a bus conductor / teacher and my team all work in the drivers cabin.


----------



## Docb (Jun 25, 2020)

Hi Keith.  Looking at risk in this way is helpful but not the end of the story.  The numbers quoted are based on an assumption that the prevalence is in the population as a whole is accurately known (which it isn't) and that it is spread evenly (which it isn't), but it is the place to start.  If it were me I would like to see a 99% confidence limit on that estimate and work to the upper bound.  Sounds like I am doom and glooming but then you have to take into account the risk of an infected person transmitting the disease to you.  You multiply the two risks together to get a better assessment of the overall risk.

Take two extreme cases. 

In the meat packing plants which have attracted attention, you have got a lot of people working closely together in a cold environment.  They probably have crowded amenity areas and are often low paid workers who may not care much about anything other than the money they earn and the operators don't like to spend money on workplace improvements.  In that scenario, if one infected employee goes to work the probability of them infecting everybody else is very high. The probability of somebody having the infection dominates and the risk of it getting into the workforce can be estimated by looking at population statistics.

In a modern workplace with well spaced out staff, decent amenities, sanitation stations, a good cleaning regime and intelligent employees who you can rely on to keep their distance you can reduce the risk of transmission to near zero.  In this scenario, it really does not matter if somebody with the disease goes to work, they will not pass it on. The probability of transmission in the workplace is the dominating factor and the risk of becoming infected is way, way less than would be suggested by population statistics.

Reality is that all workplaces fall somewhere between these two extremes. I think that the vast majority can be bought closer to low transmission risk than high transmission risk by changing working practices.  Add to that the fact that there will be a lot of peer pressure on those who don't behave themselves and social pressure on employers to sort themselves out and I am guessing that the risk of catching COVID at work can be reduced to the risk of getting killed in a car crash on your way in.

So look at the probabilities but add a large dose of common sense.  You know your workplace and the attitudes of the people who run it and make your mind up.


----------



## Keith McMillan (Jun 25, 2020)

Thanks Doc. My wife has helped me with the science. I'm better with formulae and coding. 

The nature of my job and the 1970s environment works against me. The virus still has a great presence out there. In all honesty having weighed it all up, I couldn't possibly risk a return to work in the factory and offices right now, but of course I will offer remote working if available. 

Boris contacted me (well a member of his gang) to see if I will help them catch up with the roll out of laptops, but unfortunately I had to refuse. My offer of bringing a van load of laptops didn't go down well. 

It's too early for me and better to risk a pauper's income over risk of covid. I don't like the way vulnerable people are being herded back one bit. Sorry PM.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 25, 2020)

Keith McMillan said:


> I know Boris wants us back and he doesn't seem so particular about protecting vulnerable people now, and yet we have a 1 in 1700 chance of being near an infected person.



That was only ever true if you expect to meet only one person, of course. (And if we assume everything's uniformly distributed.)

For more (sadly unsurprising) news, latest ONS survey (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest) estimates it's 1 in 1,100. (i.e., the prevalence is increasing.)


----------



## Robin (Jun 25, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> For more (sadly unsurprising) news, latest ONS survey (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest) estimates it's 1 in 1,100. (i.e., the prevalence is increasing.)


I don’t know what an 'average' will tell you really. 165 new cases at a meat packing plant in Yorkshire, no reported cases for the last week in West Oxfordshire, it’s a bit like turning in a decent HbA1c result, only half your overnights have been hypo, and you’ve spiked after every meal. But the DSN says, well done, thats fine.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 25, 2020)

Robin said:


> I don’t know what an 'average' will tell you really.



Probably not too much. Their sample seems to have been 24,256 individuals, and 14 tested positive. So the range for a 95% confidence interval is rather wide, and for the regional breakdowns it looks even wider.

But it's mostly what we have, and helps put some of the other figures into some kind of context.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jun 25, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> Probably not too much. Their sample seems to have been 24,256 individuals, and 14 tested positive. So the range for a 95% confidence interval is rather wide, and for the regional breakdowns it looks even wider.
> 
> But it's mostly what we have, and helps put some of the other figures into some kind of context.



Just idly wondering about methodology ... this virus is a clumpy clustery thing and if you're just doing a random sample I'm not sure how useful the picture will be. But then again I guess these people probably know a bit more about stats than I do


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jun 25, 2020)

Eddy Edson said:


> Just idly wondering about methodology ... this virus is a clumpy clustery thing and if you're just doing a random sample I'm not sure how useful the picture will be. But then again I guess these people probably know a bit more about stats than I do



It's a statistical survey, so increasing clumsiness will tend to increase confidence intervals. As you say, presumably they know what they're doing. (They describe the methodology and give all the confidence intervals; these aren't the press briefing slides, though it's still quite readable (well, in my opinion).)


----------



## trophywench (Jun 26, 2020)

Well they reckon abattoirs are noisy as well as cold & wet, so people have to shout if they want you to hear eg watch out that elephant carcass doesn't hit you!  - but with a lot of sharp cutting implements and the nature of the business, it's never going to be a cosy environment.


----------

