Not to wade into this on a Friday night but it's always Andy asserting that he knows best because #science.
Well here's some up to date science on social distancing:-
The CDC and WHO guidelines fail to factor in the amount of time spent indoors, which increases the chance of transmission the longer people are inside.
www.cnbc.com
MIT - pretty up there in the world of research
CNBC - a news source Andy can believe in
I've got you blocked as sick of reading your crap, but seeing as you were quoted (and I can see that) I'll respond.
I'm only repeating what the world guidance is, which is backed up by the vast majority of science and consensus, and the science and guidance is there to cover 100,000 scenarios, not just the 1, that you've found with your confirmation bias, but well done.
Well done on finding one single instance though, where that "may" not apply, there's 100,000 where it would. Your point only applies to those wearing masks though, which is encouraged (by science, which you also doubted previously). How many pubs and restaurants are open with mask-wearing inside? 0, as it's not practical or likely to happen. The situation that's being "prevented" is mixing indoors, in pubs with close proximity and not wearing a mask. Effectively your point is invalid, as usual.
There are hundreds of factors that could (and do) start to counter and degrade the effect of social distancing, but common sense suggests that being closer would never be a lesser risk than being 60 feet away, so being closer would in general be more risk.
Nobody disagrees that time, opening windows, fans, air circulation help, it's reducing viral load, another point which you've probably previously doubted.
Maybe Randy isn't so wrong on his critique of sitting / standing inside a pub and for a bonus wearing a mask seemingly (as we all know deep down) does not do anything. See throughout this the fear science has been rubbish at best and devious at worse but it is what it is. Enjoy the sunburn from today gents
Again, the sitting stops close and more numerous contact with non-mask wearers, and others you would not know, and especially safer for the staff. The mask is the only thing helping your argument from the link, take that away and your own point is disproven.
Maybe tell the entire world that mask-wearing does nothing, there are governments in charge of billions of people (largely backed by science, although some take longer to listen to it than others) who disagree with you. Same with pretty much every member of medical staff in the world, they think you're talking crap.
Wearing a mask in a pub with, windows and doors open, with good ventilation and limited timeframes, and people stood up (or sat down) near the same people for the entirety is low risk (especially now), of course it is, but that's not going to happen is it? Staff have zero chance of policing it either.
What will happen is larger groups, stood very close to each other, not wearing masks, doors and windows shut, people stood at the bar etc, which is what you even wanted all the way through. Funny that you don't seem to be as vocal during the peak infection times?
Like I've said though, there are valid arguments now of why we could be open (indoors, and stood up) anyway, cases are low, testing is numerous, immunity is increasing, there's less risk to those most at risk etc, focus on that, rather than the other BS you try and peddle.
www.telegraph.co.uk
