Writing in The Telegraph, Professors Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, of Oxford University say there is little scientific evidence to support the “2 meter” (6 feet) social distancing rule when it comes to limiting the spread of Covid19.
The University of Dundee also contends that social distancing of 2 meters is not any safer than social distancing of 1 meter.
Heneghan and Jefferson analyzed the findings of 172 studies and found just 5 of them dealt directly with coronavirus infections as related to distance. Only one cited coming within 6 feet of a patient, and that study showed the lack of social distance had no impact.
“Much of the evidence in this current outbreak informing policy is poor quality,” they wrote. “Encouragement and hand-washing are what we need, not formalised rules.”
A University of Dundee study suggests that 78% of the risk of infection of Covid19 occurs at a distance below 1 meter (about 3 feet) and there is only an 11% chance of any increased distance making a difference.
“Our conclusion is that avoiding contact is very important and that a one-metre distance might be slightly better than just avoiding contact, but the difference is unlikely to be much,” wrote Dr Mike Lonergan, a senior scientist after reviewing 25 papers compiled for the World Health Organisation (WHO). “These data give no indication that two metres is better than one metre.”
We’ve discussed previously that there is little scientific basis for the “social distancing” project and how it’s origins are actually a high-school student’s class project.
Photo by Airman Amanda Lovelace, U.S. Air Force