Advertisement

Science behind two-metre rule 'does not consider economic devastation it brings'

A sign reminds customers at a DIY store in London about observing the two-metre rule - Ming Yeung/Getty Images Europe
A sign reminds customers at a DIY store in London about observing the two-metre rule - Ming Yeung/Getty Images Europe
Coronavirus Article Bar with counter
Coronavirus Article Bar with counter

The science behind the two-metre rule aimed at preventing the spread of coronavirus fails to take into account the "economic devastation" it causes, a leading sociologist has warned.

Professor Robert Dingwall, a member of one of the sub-groups feeding into the Government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), said that there would still be a "safety margin" even if the distance was cut to one metre, because was "very rare" for virus particles to travel that far.

The Government has come under intense pressure from businesses and some Tory MPs to relax the rule amid concerns that it will make it unviable for some firms – especially pubs and restaurants – to reopen.

A study published in The Lancet found that physical distancing of at least one metre lowers the risk of coronavirus transmission, but distances of two metres could be more effective.

The risk of infection when people stand more than a metre away from the infected individual was found to be three per cent, and 13 per cent if within a metre.

Coronavirus podcast newest episode
Coronavirus podcast newest episode

Prof Dingwall told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the study was "problematic" because it did not look at the economic consequences of having a larger distance requirement.

"I think it's a question of relative risk," he said. "Even the problematic Lancet study that was published last week was really saying you're moving from a tiny risk at two metres to a very small risk at one metre.

"You have to set that against all the other harms that are being done by the economic devastation that is wreaked by the two-metre rule, the deaths that will be attributable to the lockdown itself, and the social and economic disruption that is causing."

Prof Dingwall, a member of the new and emerging respiratory virus threats advisory group (Nervtag), added: "The work on transmission in naturally occurring environments suggests that it's very rare for particles to travel much more than half a metre.

"So you have that safety margin which is built in. And actually, as you get closer to people, you do begin to invade on personal space.

"With the exception of some very specific environments, like the London Tube at rush hour, you don't let people get back close to you unless they are members of your household – children, romantic partners, people with whom you have a very close relationship.

"So there is a kind of natural boundary around people, and one metre is roughly double that."

Alok Sharma, the Business Secretary, was repeatedly asked about the two-metre rule at the Downing Street press conference on Tuesday.

"When it is safe to do so, we will see whether you can move to a shorter distance, but ultimately we keep all of these things under review," he said.

"There are other countries in the world that have moved from two metres to closer distances. Of course, they are further along in terms of their road map, in terms of opening up businesses.

"We are taking a cautious view on this. I completely understand why, for economic reasons, businesses will want to have a look at this two-metre rule."