To clarify the one hour of exercise 'rule'

[Itstheprinciple]

I've seen this mentioned on so many posts and I've seen people clarify it within the post but I've not seen a specific post about it. I thought this could help people who seem confused about what is 'allowed'.

Michael Gove was asked on the Andrew Marr show what he considered to be reasonable exercise. This is his response:

"I would have thought that for most people, a walk of up to an hour, or a run of 30 minutes or a cycle ride of between that, depending on their level of fitness is appropriate."

So it is not a hard and fast rule or law. No one is standing with a stopwatch as it gets to 59 mins. It's guidance and it will vary between individuals as Mr Gove says himself.

People have been infantilised for so long they really can’t take all the information and work out what it means
That’s exactly what people are doing.
Working out what it means for them, within the social distancing advice. If you go out for an hour and see nobody, that’s no difference to going out for two hours and meeting nobody
True, which is why given the law doesn't state 1hour of exercise I'm quite happy taking my dogs on a longer walk each day rather than have them getting excitable and bored in the garden.

However, for every person exercising reasonable common sense, there's another who acts like a petulant child trying to find a way to justify why the law doesn't apply to them.
Eg. The law states we should food shop as infrequently as possible with no stated numbers of trips because everyone has different circumstances.
Most sensible and reasonable people would see that and know that, for example, a larger family who can't get enough milk or cereal for the week may have go shop twice a week, or someone who doesn't drive and shops at their local mini supermarket may have to go 3 times a week. Most rational people entirely understand this and understand the law was written in this way precisely because of these different circumstances.

Then there's people who decide that they want chocolate/beer/a magazine and so go for additional trips, totally ignoring both the law and the guidelines, and can often be found claiming "you can't invent the law! Police state!" when anyone challenges the fact they are completely ignoring what the law actually says.
After that they sound like sulky teenagers pointing out that technically it says reasonable excuse / technically a bar of chocolate in that moment, every time they want a treat is actually essential.

Really what they're saying is 'stuff the additional people in the shops, stuff the higher risk for spreading the virus, stuff trying to limit the number of customers the shop staff come into contact with, stuff what the NHS workers are saying because I want my treat and I want it now".

Some people are openly showing zero regard for the law and dislike being challenged on it.

It's massively depressing how quickly people stop using their (not so) common sense and hand over even the tiniest bit if initiative to the state/police/neighbours. Everyone needs to keep well away from physical contact with others when outside in any location. Anyone with suspect symptoms must stay inside. That's it.

No one gives a stuff about our mental or physical health or whether we are used to doing exercise

Who has said that?

People are talking about their exercise and their mental health. It must be extremely hard for people who are shielding. As part of my role, I work with people who are shielding and who are sufferering poor mental health at the moment. It's hard to hear their stories.

That does not mean I can't exercise twice a day though, does it?

No one gives a stuff about our mental or physical health or whether we are used to doing exercise

Are you saying your mental health would improve if you knew other people were suffering more? If you knew that abused women weren't allowed to leave their home for a bit for respite? That people whose muscle pain is eased by going for a walk stopped going? Or even just if people who are in perfectly good health and fancy some fresh air stopped going for a walk?

Because that's how it comes across. And it sounds very bitter.

I live in a part of the UK where the health service waiting lists (before Corona) are incredibly long. My son has a four year wait to see an ENT specialist. Should I start complaining that no one else should be allowed to see an ENT specialist until they have waited for four years as well? My son is suffering, so every other family should suffer too right?

Where does it end? Some people can't walk at all due to paralysis. Should no one walk ever, just because they can't?

If your mental health is dependent on knowing that the entire population is as miserable as they can possibly be, I really have no words.

It’s also the case that these measures have been put in place specifically to safeguard the physical health of people who are very vulnerable so to suggest no one cares is ridiculous. I agree it sounds really bitter too.

@JustAnotherPoster00

@ spirit of the law

Im seeing this reductive bollocks trotted out on all CV-19 threads lately, wtf is the 'spirit' of the law?

The spirit of the law is a well established concept looking at why a law was made. Where the wording (ie the letter of the law) is unclear - as everyone keeps pointing out in the current circumstances the judiciary And the people abiding the law will interpret what or actually means. There’s several different ways of trying to establish this.

So for example what is meant by “reasonable” it is not what every individual thinks themselves. In absence of definition in the actual legislation as in this case the judge will look to the ordinary meaning of the word -usually it’s dictionary definition which in this context would Be

as much as is appropriate or fair; moderate

But what is appropriate or fair:moderate?

Well there you could look to case law if there was anything relevant. Otherwise let’s look at what the hypothetical man with all the information that is publicly available to him would say. Well we have been repeatedly told by members of the legislature to follow the spirit of the law, ie what the law is trying to achieve, this is to minimise social contact and stay home. So undoubtably this should heavily feed into the interpretation.

The mistake the government have made is thinking that the country is not populated by idiotic tests who can’t even fucking google to work out what a word means in a context.

@PicsInRed

I’m assuming your criticism of middle class people sipping pimms of in their gardens is some kind of joke and you think only working class people drinking Stella in their back yards If their council house commit domestic murder. carry on with your ill informed prejudices.

It’s neither a law not a guideline. Use your brains please, people!

What I'm saying is that many people are having to find ways to cope that doesn't include going out multiple times per day for exercise.

Yes, my pain has gone through the roof because I can't do my usual exercise or go for my weekly physio or have hand therapy. Yes, all of my hospital appointments are cancelled, including one to arrange surgery that I've been waiting ages for. But I have to find other ways to manage all of this so what is wrong with you all accepting the one period of exercise per day for an hour and then finding other ways to cope inside?

Various pieces of research are indicating that this can be spread outdoors by people exercising and that the range is much larger than two metres. What if that turns out to be true and people exercising outdoors have been responsible for continuing the spread so that lockdown has to be extended? Do you think that's fair on people who are desperate to get out? Maybe the government should legislate for some days each week when only shielded people are allowed outside so that we could get out for some exercise without the risk of bumping into people?

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras I’ll say it again: there is no one hour once a day law prevents regulation. Please please stop saying this!

Law or regulation

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras I’ll say it again: there is no one hour once a day law prevents regulation. Please please stop saying this!

And even when people do only exercise outside for a short time you keep attempting to make them feel guilty for doing it.

I’ll say it again: there is no one hour once a day law prevents regulation. Please please stop saying this!

Where have I said that it's the law? Please please stop saying that I said that.

The one period of exercise per day is in the government guidelines, it is in all of the information that the government put out. It's very clear in what they say. It isn't in the law but it is in all of the guidelines that they give.

The one hour per day was suggested by Michael Gove but again in the government guidelines it stipulates that when you leave the house, for one of four permitted reasons, you should minimise the time you are out.

Going out for six hours, or running 10k isn't, by any stretch, minimising time out

Dear god, I give up

as everyone keeps pointing out in the current circumstances

The law seems pretty clear to me.
You need a reasonable excuse to be out.
Going out to exercise is a reasonable excuse.

What's unclear about that?

Running 10k can be reducing time out when you're used to 21k

Given that we are in this for the long haul with little signs of unfettered normality in the next year, surely we want those people falling ill with Covid 19 to maintain as much fitness as possible to maintain healthy lung capacities. Excess visceral fat puts more pressure on the lungs ( potentially a reason why men are struggling more than women) Unnecessarily sitting around indoors gaining weight and losing lung capacity does no one including the NHS any favours.

I got SPD in pregnancy. Between that and the nausea in the early months, pregnancy was a write off for anything more than basic functional movement. I felt shit. It brought me close to depression- had it been a permanent state of health I probably would have become depressed. But just because a situation deprived me of things that I enjoyed, I have no right to ask other people to give up the things that they are still capable of doing. Sure I'm jealous of women running 5k at the stage where I needed physically pulling off the sofa because it was too much stress on my pelvis, but it's in a "good for you, I wish I could" rather than a dog in the manger, "If I couldn't, no one else can" way.

I run 10k in less than an hour...

I'm now confused. Does that mean I can or can't run 10k today? (I'm going to anyway)..

No one gives a stuff about our mental or physical health or whether we are used to doing exercise I thought the whole point of shielding was to protect your health.

I've seen some people doing really long runs on Strava and I don't know they have the patience. I get bored anyway when I am on my own but I get really fed up having to dodge people all the time. They're not all going out at 6am either.

I don't think 10k is a long run, there are people in my club who can easily run 10k in 40 minutes or less. On a good day I would do it in about 50, still not extreme I don't think.

Various pieces of research are indicating that this can be spread outdoors by people exercising and that the range is much larger than two metres

No, one piece of non-peer-reviewed research has indicated it may be possible. Not "various".

But just because a situation deprived me of things that I enjoyed, I have no right to ask other people to give up the things that they are still capable of doing.

Really? Even if those people were stopping you from doing what you wanted to do you still would have thought "good for you"?

People keep saying if you live in a town or city then it's different, but is it? Do you think people who live in a busy town, who just don't have to go out exercising three times a day or for six hours, are thinking that they won't do it because then others can't because it will be too busy? In those situations, people going out multiple times a day may very well be stopping others from going out at all.

I've been tempted to go out for a walk, doing what is encouraged on here and thinking critically. Now, I can't make a good risk assessment because I don't have all the facts - why are shielded people not allowed out for a walk? Is it because there is a risk from catching it from a greater distance than two metres and we just aren't being told that? But, maybe I would chance it if I knew that I could maintain a really safe distance from others - but I can't, because it's just too busy here. We are seeing the same people walk past out house several times a day. So, how is that fair? If they all stuck to once per day for about an hour maybe there would be times when it would be quiet enough for me to go out.

Dear god the misunderstanding of the purpose of lockdown on this and so many other threads is mind blowing

people exercising outdoors have been responsible for continuing the spread so that lockdown has to be extended

yeah right. If you out for a run it is highly unlikely you are infected. And before you shout at me about "asymptomatic" I think it highly unlikely that people are truly sans symptoms, they just don't notice. But believe me, if you go running, and your body is fighting something behind the scenes, you will know. If you take a lot more effort to run a lot more slowly, that will trigger alarm bells.

As an example, I have donated blood since I was 18 and never felt any ill-effects. It was a shock when I donated for the first time since starting to run, I couldn't work out what was wrong with me as I had no energy. I don't notice it in everyday life at all, or even swimming.

It is simply not true that runners are running around their local areas spreading the virus everywhere.

No, one piece of non-peer-reviewed research has indicated it may be possible. Not "various".

I've seen three. One from Norway, one from Holland and another about droplet spread from breathing, sneezing and coughing. So, 3

I thought the whole point of shielding was to protect your health.

It's to protect us from dying from C19. My physical health is more than just the risk from a virus. What about my joints and muscles, my stamina, my cardiovascular health?

If you out for a run it is highly unlikely you are infected

Well, there's another thread running where a lady with symptoms has carried on running because she didn't realise that she was supposed to stop. She claims that the advice said stay at home for seven days, but you can still exercise, so she has been doing. I wouldn't assume anything if I were you, and you might think people aren't asymptomatic but that is what scientists are saying.

So you want us all to stop running?
Just for you
Sorry, no chance
I have a family history of mental health and serious cardiac problems
I'll take my cardiologists advice to maintain regular cardio exercise and to maintain a healthy weight to minimise my risk of dying of a heart attack in the next five years like two my my siblings nearly did
And I will walk or run daily to counteract the mental health impact of what I see and hear in work on a daily basis
I'll do it considerately
And my run around the deserted streets by my house (or any one else's run) won't be what decides when lockdown has to be exited