Covid-19 and purity spirals

[DreadPirateLuna]

Covid-19 is a very serious illness which threatens our most vulnerable and risks overwhelming the NHS. We should all do what we can to flatten the curve and save lives. People whose behaviour risks lives (e.g. urban residents traveling out to holiday homes in rural communities) should face criticism and sanctions.

However, I can't help feeling that some of the outrage at some behaviours is less about reducing the spread and more about getting caught in a "purity spiral".

Take all the outrage about people in parks. Fresh air and sunshine is good for physical and mental health, it improves the immune system which is particularly important during an epidemic! Many urban residents have no other source of open space except the local park. The ability to get outside can be lifesaving for victims of DV. Risks of contracting disease are very low if you keep your distance from others outside your household.

Yet I've seen photos of walkers and family groups in parks, keeping far away from others, but accused of selfishness and killing the elderly and disrespecting the NHS. Parks in London have been closed, meaning more congestion of other areas and residents confined to homes, which is damaging for reasons outlined above.

And it's usually (though not exclusively) women and esp mothers who get blamed. Those selfish Karens and their broods.

A more sensible solution would be to allow restricted access to the parks. Maybe allow only locals in nearby flats without gardens. But it seems we're not doing sensible these days.

Um, if you're sitting down at a safe distance from other people (and waah your hands when you get home, etc) then how can the virus infect you?

If any scientists have commented about the risk of catching the virus while sitting on a park bench away from other people (except members of your own household) I'd be v interested to see what they've said.

Everyone can go, if they follow the guidelines for social distancing. What's the problem with that?

Because everyone doesn't do it do they?

Um, if you're sitting down at a safe distance from other people (and waah your hands when you get home, etc) then how can the virus infect you?

If you're sitting down you are likely to be spending longer there, which means more people there. Secondly, the risk of infection is in touching your eyes and face. Many people do it without thinking so washing your hands when you get home won't help much if you infected yourself by unthinkingly rubbing your eye while you were out.

Mayor of London on TV now saying you can go out once per day to exercise, exercise doesn't include having a picnic.

IrenetheQuaint

Go and do it then if you're so convinced that it's safe to do so. Do the decent thing though and don't use the NHS if you do catch it.

If you are sitting on your own in a park far from anyone else, you are not going to catch or transmit the virus. However, if someone comes up to "challenge" you then they need to encroach on your space, therefore increasing the risk.

If you shut down all parks and streets, then teenagers in tower blocks will meet in the hallways and stairways, therefore transmitting the virus more easily between them.

We could make the epidemic worse by measures that are meant to make it better.

A month ago I was screaming at the govt for not taking more stringent measures, letting gigs and sports events take place. And I have been sticking to "the rules". This isn't about me.

I go out for a long walk or a shorter run every day in one of our two local parks. I have seen a couple of poor social distancing incidents, but in my (admittedly small) sample at least 99% of people are following guidelines.

I really believe that completely preventing people from leaving their homes will be a disaster. Think carefully about the consequences before you advocate that.

Does it matter if it was 1000 or 3000? If it was ok for the 1000 to go to the park then why can't everyone who wants to go turn up? How do you stop 10,000 people going? If it's ok for one then it's ok for all. Might as well just end lockdown

Daily totals. Not 3000 all there at once. Average of 400 in a very big park. . The council was as bad at reading the stats as you ( it has been pointed out by several people that it has been thoroughly debunked ) and over reacted by closing it.

So why is it ok for 400 people to do it? If it's ok for those, it's ok for everyone or are you going to choose who can go?

If you are sitting on your own in a park far from anyone else, you are not going to catch or transmit the virus

So, by that thinking going out for a walk must be zero risk too. So why have the people who are shielded been told not to go out at all? Why are we being protected from a zero risk? There must be some sort of a risk associated with going out for a walk or we would be allowed to do it. Do you know that a park bench isn't a fomite?

"IrenetheQuaint. Go and do it then if you're so convinced that it's safe to do so. Do the decent thing though and don't use the NHS if you do catch it."

Gosh, are you suggesting that if I come down with severe coronavirus I should die alone rather than bothering the NHS? How sweet of you.

I do go out every day to exercise, but don't sit on benches since I have no need to. However, I have zero problem with people who do need to sit down doing so.

Re the previous poster - I agree that going out of the house is not "zero risk", which is why people with serious health conditions are advised not to. However, the government has clearly taken the decision that, for people under 70 without serious health conditions, going out of the house for one of the reasons laid down in regulations(such as exercise), is relatively low risk if one stays 2m away from people who aren't members of the same household. Seems reasonable to me.

400 people in a HUGE park, exercising - yes, of course , it is ok for them to be there. It is allowed, or do you not understand that ? I have just come back from a brisk walk in a huge park myself, with my DH. Quite a few people there but big distances between them - everyone behaving very well. Exercise is good for the immune system and good for general health .

Gosh, are you suggesting that if I come down with severe coronavirus I should die alone rather than bothering the NHS? How sweet of you.Gosh, are you suggesting that if I come down with severe coronavirus I should die alone rather than bothering the NHS? How sweet of you.

If you go and do something that you've been specifically told not to do then I don't think you have right to expect healthcare workers to risk their lives in order to treat you.

And yes, going out of the house is low risk, not no risk as this poster said

If you are sitting on your own in a park far from anyone else, you are not going to catch or transmit the virus

A bench could well be a fomite

Low risk: person sitting in park by themselves

Increased risk: someone else getting close enough to tell that person they're breaking the rules

Higher risk: person meeting other people indoors where they can't be policed

Even higher risk: person spending 24 hours a day in a tiny flat with severe asthma/depression/violent partner

Or

Low risk - one person sitting on a bench

High risk - 1000 other people thinking " if they can do it, so can I" and then everyone thinking it's ok to relax the boundaries.

Either there's a rule in place or there isn't.

And can we please direct our anger at people in power who ignored this situation for far too long and are still not providing enough testing and PPE? Do we have to waste it on working-class people trying to get a bit of sun?

But 400 people, or even 3000, weren’t all sitting on a bench ?

I absolutely am expressing anger for those in power, and for those who voted them into power.

Do you have data to show that the people are working class? Regardless, I doubt the virus eases off because the person is working class. Why does class matter?

But 400 people, or even 3000, weren’t all sitting on a bench ?

But they were in the vicinity of each other. Public gatherings aren't allowed.

They weren't in the vicinity of each other. They were in a massive park keeping their distance.

I agree OP, I have thought about purity spirals when looking at the local coronavirus support group on FB.

But they were in the vicinity of each other. Public gatherings aren't allowed.

It. Wasn’t. A. Public. Gathering.

It. Was. Individual. People. Exercising. Individually. In. A. Bloody . Great. Big. Space.

Not the football crowd you seem determined to imagine.

Is sunbathing, having a picnic, sitting in the park permitted? No it isn't. We can go out to exercise or shop, not sunbathe or have s sit on the park bench.

Why are people so determined to make a stand or find a loophole? Doing that is increasing the risk each time either by coming into closer contact or by creating fomites. There is no chance that those individuals all maintained social distancing at all times in that park. MN has so many threads with people complaining about cyclists or joggers passing too close, dogs off leads coming up to them, young children getting too close. Each of those interactions is an opportunity to.pass the virus on. It's irresponsible and if they tighten the lockdown it will be the fault of everyone who thought it was ok to bend the rules.

Covid 19 is far less infectious than chickenpox. It is mainly spread by droplet spread by prolonged close contact. The most neurotic person does not "win" the argument here. Parties and meeting up with people outside your household are banned. Sitting on a bench for 5 minutes part way through your walk isn't

The people in the park last weekend weren't just sitting on a bench for a five minute breather were they? Again, if these activities are "no risk" why are those who are shielded not even allowed outside of their house? That must mean that there is a possibility of us catching it just by going for a walk, so there must be a greater chance of catching it by touching an object, like a bench.

Here's another example:
www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/cabinet-minister-robert-jenrick-visited-his-parents-during-covid-19-lockdown

OMG, politician travels to visit parents, shock horror. But when you read down into the story, he traveled to drop off food and medicine, and he never entered the house. The rules allow for care of the elderly, including dropping off essential goods, so Jenrick wasn't breaking any law and he was actually reducing risks to his vulnerable parents. But that wasn't good enough for the scolds.

This is all showing some fascinating patterns in terms of people with a need to control others. Lots and lots of them work for the police, but not all.