Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Distancing

Fitness tips, Relaxation, Mind and Body
gnawsome
Lemon Slice
Posts: 406
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 4:44 pm
Has thanked: 764 times
Been thanked: 71 times

Distancing

#296155

Postby gnawsome » March 31st, 2020, 3:29 pm

Moderator Message:
Moved this from DAK to Heatlh & Wellbeing leaving a link as it had become something of a discussion (to which I am guilty of contributing). - Chris

Just how does it work.
I can understand that humans standing can project vapour for 2m but what happens at 2m?
Do the droplets fall straight to the floor or do they have some sort of trajectory, or do they expire by a time factor?
Thus if two are sitting or lying is 2m unnecessary and if 1 standing and one lying at floor level is only the lower at risk.
I wonder too, if there is air movement does that much alter the distance required

Midsmartin
Lemon Slice
Posts: 778
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:18 am
Has thanked: 211 times
Been thanked: 491 times

Re: Distancing

#296162

Postby Midsmartin » March 31st, 2020, 3:41 pm

Its an arbitrary number I think. Maybe it's based on modelling or test data from a different virus.

You might expect the density of virus particles to decrease with the square of the distance (is that right?). The chance of being infected correlates in some way to the number of virus particles you inhale. Obviously it's different if you are in a small room or downwind.

2m is enough that you can pass someone in the street and have a conversation.

jackdaww
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2081
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:53 am
Has thanked: 3203 times
Been thanked: 417 times

Re: Distancing

#296171

Postby jackdaww » March 31st, 2020, 3:56 pm

i am doing 10ft ie 3 metres - why take risks .

avoid shouts and guffaws .

:idea:

genou
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1070
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 177 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: Distancing

#296303

Postby genou » March 31st, 2020, 10:29 pm

The story as I have understood it is that contact is the main ( and perhaps only ) transmission route, and 2 metres is enough to rule that out.

Without contact it's about diffusion rates of the aerosol from the carrier through the air. 2 metres is safe for a decent amount of time, but it is not magic. I think 2 metres is good for about 15 minutes in still air. There is no confirmation the C19 transmits in aerosol, so it's a question of how lucky you feel.

There's then transmission via surfaces, but that's a different story.

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10691
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1459 times
Been thanked: 2965 times

Re: Distancing

#296329

Postby UncleEbenezer » March 31st, 2020, 11:21 pm

Yardstick - 2 metres is the kind of distance that takes the kick out of many bad smells, like a fresh dog or horse mess. Or indoors, a baby that needs changing.

On the other hand, take something much nastier and it's wholly inadequate. You want 20 metres from a smoker in average weather, and occasionally even 200m isn't enough. Airborne hazards, even in small quantities, can travel a long way!

I seem to recollect much bigger distances being required for Foot&Mouth in 2001!

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5244
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3244 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: Distancing

#296420

Postby didds » April 1st, 2020, 9:51 am

I took it as 2 meters is sort of two arms lengths ie furher apart that people wont accidentally touch anybody cos you are both at leats an arms length from each other

one throey anyway!

LOL

didds

DrFfybes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3732
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 10:25 pm
Has thanked: 1171 times
Been thanked: 1964 times

Re: Distancing

#296435

Postby DrFfybes » April 1st, 2020, 10:34 am

I suspect that it is a combination of things - 2m certainly prevents person to person contact, but a sneeze will carry further (ISTR Italy initially said 1m, and Australia said 1.5 metres for a while, perhaps they have shorter arms?).

It is obviously a compromise between safety and practicality, a distance people know and feel comfortable with, enough to mitigate virus spread but not too far, so normal conversations can be had, expressions read, and also feasible for walking down the street or queuing.

These measure are to reduce the spread ofthe virus whilst still maintaining some semblence of normality - 10m would be safer, but a lot less practical.

Paul

richfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3492
Joined: November 19th, 2016, 2:02 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 1280 times

Re: Distancing

#296513

Postby richfool » April 1st, 2020, 12:44 pm

Yes, I saw a programme on I think Channel 4 last week, that was demonstrating that a cough or sneeze could carry 6m+. I personally try and keep 3m or more distance from others, and if I am likely to be in a situation where others will be closer than that, such as in a shop, I wear a facemask.

The TV programme also showed how people touch so many things in their daily activities, things that others then touch. E.g, tube and bus bulkheads, doors, hand rails, etc, and at home & work, things like fridge, kettle, microwave, door handles, work tops.

gnawsome
Lemon Slice
Posts: 406
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 4:44 pm
Has thanked: 764 times
Been thanked: 71 times

Re: Distancing

#296521

Postby gnawsome » April 1st, 2020, 12:53 pm

Thanks guys (incl) for your interpretations. Sense in all of them.
I conclude that the distance is, whoever creates the distance determines that distance subject to a 2m min rule of thumb.
Tesco patrons generally complying and very polite
Local pharmacy patrons were at 3~5m in the open air, then inside would approach counter via centre aisle and depart using same aisle! How much intelect required to use either of the other unoccupied ailses.

DrFfybes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3732
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 10:25 pm
Has thanked: 1171 times
Been thanked: 1964 times

Re: Distancing

#296679

Postby DrFfybes » April 1st, 2020, 7:12 pm

richfool wrote:Yes, I saw a programme on I think Channel 4 last week, that was demonstrating that a cough or sneeze could carry 6m+. I personally try and keep 3m or more distance from others, and if I am likely to be in a situation where others will be closer than that, such as in a shop, I wear a facemask.

The TV programme also showed how people touch so many things in their daily activities, things that others then touch. E.g, tube and bus bulkheads, doors, hand rails, etc, and at home & work, things like fridge, kettle, microwave, door handles, work tops.


Did you see the program yesterday about how the virus goes straight through most face masks (unless of the correct rating and fitted correctly), and as they get wet from your breath passing droplets can stick to them and get sucked through?

Add in the number of people who fiddle with them once fitted (rubbing their face or removing glasses to demist them) or touch their face remove them, and I suspect a facemask increases your likelyhood of catching it.

IF someone sneezes in your face and you immediately replace the mask and your eyes were already covered, then there is a theoretcial benefit of a 'generic' mask, but probably better off with a face shield.

Paul

richfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3492
Joined: November 19th, 2016, 2:02 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 1280 times

Re: Distancing

#296701

Postby richfool » April 1st, 2020, 7:44 pm

DrFfybes wrote:
richfool wrote:Yes, I saw a programme on I think Channel 4 last week, that was demonstrating that a cough or sneeze could carry 6m+. I personally try and keep 3m or more distance from others, and if I am likely to be in a situation where others will be closer than that, such as in a shop, I wear a facemask.

The TV programme also showed how people touch so many things in their daily activities, things that others then touch. E.g, tube and bus bulkheads, doors, hand rails, etc, and at home & work, things like fridge, kettle, microwave, door handles, work tops.


Did you see the program yesterday about how the virus goes straight through most face masks (unless of the correct rating and fitted correctly), and as they get wet from your breath passing droplets can stick to them and get sucked through?

Add in the number of people who fiddle with them once fitted (rubbing their face or removing glasses to demist them) or touch their face remove them, and I suspect a facemask increases your likelyhood of catching it.

IF someone sneezes in your face and you immediately replace the mask and your eyes were already covered, then there is a theoretcial benefit of a 'generic' mask, but probably better off with a face shield.

Paul

Yes, I do take your points. Though as Snorvey said, most of Asia wear them. When I was in Thailand 6 weeks back just about everyone was wearing them. People there seem to wear them whenever they have a cough or cold. Facemasks must surely inhibit the wearer from projecting droplets so far, though agreed the mask would probably get impregnated if not saturated.

Certainly with cigarette smoke, I can smell that 30 plus metres away in the street.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10371
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3601 times
Been thanked: 5229 times

Re: Distancing

#296709

Postby Arborbridge » April 1st, 2020, 7:54 pm

jackdaww wrote:i am doing 10ft ie 3 metres - why take risks .

avoid shouts and guffaws .

:idea:


In this context, shouters and guffawers are anti-social - as are (with much lower down the scale) runners and cyclists*. It's people on park benches or taking their dogs for a walk at some lonely spot who are receiving attention from the police yet those folk are less harm to anyone. Topsy-turvy.

* this isn't some diatribe against these groups personally as I notice most of them give me a decent distance. However, I cannot help seeing in my mind's eye the vortexing trail of aerosols they leave behind.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10371
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3601 times
Been thanked: 5229 times

Re: Distancing

#296711

Postby Arborbridge » April 1st, 2020, 8:03 pm

gnawsome wrote:Thanks guys (incl) for your interpretations. Sense in all of them.
I conclude that the distance is, whoever creates the distance determines that distance subject to a 2m min rule of thumb.
Tesco patrons generally complying and very polite
Local pharmacy patrons were at 3~5m in the open air, then inside would approach counter via centre aisle and depart using same aisle! How much intelect required to use either of the other unoccupied ailses.


I had an interesting example of unintended consequence in my pharmacy today. I was the only one in the shop, until a lady came in behind, but stood as far possible from me and the counter - about 3 metres from me.
The pharmacy then told her they had a one person only policy in the shop, so this lady left and stood outside.

The unintended consequence? On my way out, she and I were only about half a metre apart, if that, so the pharmacist had unwittingly exposed me to more risk than if she had left well alone.

Another thin I've noticed walking along paths is that people, on seeing you approach, develop a sudden interest in something like a flower or the view, or just checking a tree or something which is a few metres off the path. When you have gone passed, they lose interest and carry on.
It's quite cute really, but it does remind me of that episode of Fawlty Towers with the Australian lady, in which Basil kept being caught out and pretended to check the walls to see if they were still OK.

Arb.

Arb.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4097 times

Re: Distancing

#296772

Postby tjh290633 » April 1st, 2020, 11:14 pm

Arborbridge wrote:Another thin I've noticed walking along paths is that people, on seeing you approach, develop a sudden interest in something like a flower or the view, or just checking a tree or something which is a few metres off the path. When you have gone passed, they lose interest and carry on.
It's quite cute really, but it does remind me of that episode of Fawlty Towers with the Australian lady, in which Basil kept being caught out and pretended to check the walls to see if they were still OK.

On the narrow footpath between our lane and the village, we operate like a single line railway with passing loops. If you see someone coming and you get to the passing spot first, you withdraw into it while the other passes by. It seems to work quite well.

TJH

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10691
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1459 times
Been thanked: 2965 times

Re: Distancing

#296792

Postby UncleEbenezer » April 2nd, 2020, 1:03 am

tjh290633 wrote:On the narrow footpath between our lane and the village, we operate like a single line railway with passing loops. If you see someone coming and you get to the passing spot first, you withdraw into it while the other passes by. It seems to work quite well.

TJH

You could have the makings of a fine comedy sketch there. No doubt work nicely on film. You dart into the passing spot, whereupon you see the other person already there and do a little dance. Then the next person sees someone else coming the other way, also ducks into the passing spot. Repeat as the crowd grows, and the Distancing Dance grows ever more elaborate and futile. Maybe with added elements, like someone has a dog on a lead ...

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10371
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3601 times
Been thanked: 5229 times

Re: Distancing

#296835

Postby Arborbridge » April 2nd, 2020, 8:20 am

tjh290633 wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:Another thin I've noticed walking along paths is that people, on seeing you approach, develop a sudden interest in something like a flower or the view, or just checking a tree or something which is a few metres off the path. When you have gone passed, they lose interest and carry on.
It's quite cute really, but it does remind me of that episode of Fawlty Towers with the Australian lady, in which Basil kept being caught out and pretended to check the walls to see if they were still OK.

On the narrow footpath between our lane and the village, we operate like a single line railway with passing loops. If you see someone coming and you get to the passing spot first, you withdraw into it while the other passes by. It seems to work quite well.

TJH


A similar place here, but there is one long stretch on boardwalk across boggy ground through the woods where one cannot see to the end due to the curve. Here we could to with traffic lights!

But I have to say that everyone is being very observant and civilised about the whole thing. We give a little wave from a distance. almost apologetic that we can't say hello properly or comment on the weather as in more normal times.

And the traffic! - or lack of. It's like going back in time, almost to the mid fifties, and quite refreshing. I remember a time when only one person had a car in our village, and later my dad was the first person to buy a brand new one.

Arb.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4097 times

Re: Distancing

#296894

Postby tjh290633 » April 2nd, 2020, 10:38 am

UncleEbenezer wrote:
tjh290633 wrote:On the narrow footpath between our lane and the village, we operate like a single line railway with passing loops. If you see someone coming and you get to the passing spot first, you withdraw into it while the other passes by. It seems to work quite well.

TJH

You could have the makings of a fine comedy sketch there. No doubt work nicely on film. You dart into the passing spot, whereupon you see the other person already there and do a little dance. Then the next person sees someone else coming the other way, also ducks into the passing spot. Repeat as the crowd grows, and the Distancing Dance grows ever more elaborate and futile. Maybe with added elements, like someone has a dog on a lead ...

We often comment that we are doing a lateral arabesque, or a pas des deux. All we need is suitable music.

Of course the dogs tend to come looking to be petted, if the lead is long enough. A lot are those retractable type.

TJH

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4764
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 4814 times
Been thanked: 2083 times

Re: Distancing

#297879

Postby csearle » April 4th, 2020, 10:10 pm

There's an advert going around where three three cyclists are doing their exercise line astern. Each time I see it I imagine that if the first one sneezes the second will gulp in their exhaust as he/she enters the airspace.

So I think that there are many factors at play. At least one researcher said on the radio recently that they have shown with other viruses of the same family (corona) that a mere fleeting sharing of airspace with an infected source is highly unlikely to result in an infection. By the same token a prolonged period (I think half an hour was mentioned) in close proximity would be a different matter.

Also, it is clear to me (as an amateur epidemiologist - ha ha) that individuals that are subject to a higher viral load (nurses, care workers, doctors, etc.) experience a more severe reaction, even for those with no known respiratory issues, several sadly resulting in death. For this reason I suspect that a tangential encounter with the virus for otherwise healthy people, resulting in milder symptoms is probably hugely preferential for them. It wouldn't help the slowing down of the spread though, so not very altruistic.

Chris

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10691
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1459 times
Been thanked: 2965 times

Re: Distancing

#297884

Postby UncleEbenezer » April 4th, 2020, 10:50 pm

csearle wrote:Also, it is clear to me (as an amateur epidemiologist - ha ha) that individuals that are subject to a higher viral load (nurses, care workers, doctors, etc.) experience a more severe reaction, even for those with no known respiratory issues, several sadly resulting in death. For this reason I suspect that a tangential encounter with the virus for otherwise healthy people, resulting in milder symptoms is probably hugely preferential for them. It wouldn't help the slowing down of the spread though, so not very altruistic.

Chris

As an equally unqualified commentator, another possible explanation for that crossed my mind. What if there were variants in the virus itself - or the accompanying proteins on which it thrives? With some variants in the virus or ecosystem being more deadly than others?

The majority with milder symptoms are not the ones needing medical attention. So the medics are particularly exposed to the most deadly variants.

Conversely, that would tend to be Good News if you picked it up from someone well enough to be out-and-about.

And of course there's another pretty strong effect. Media reporting of the deaths of medics is anecdotal, but statistically meaningless. The impression of a higher death rate amongst medics is subjective, and may very well have no basis in reality.

Howard
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2178
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:26 pm
Has thanked: 885 times
Been thanked: 1017 times

Re: Distancing

#297898

Postby Howard » April 5th, 2020, 12:42 am

I was surprised to see that the local council have put notices on some of our country footpaths which are occasionally restricted by hedges indicating that they should be one-way only. Until a couple of weeks ago, I would walk them and not see a single person. Now they are quite "crowded".

It's a little surreal, to see one-way notices on paths which are out in the countryside. But in the current situation I realise I'm very lucky to be able to walk across fields a few hundred metres from home.

regards

Howard


Return to “Health & Wellbeing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests