Face coverings to be compulsory ....

[TheOstrich]

... on public transport from 15th June.

Well, I hope this is temporary, because otherwise they've just killed a large part of the leisure market stone dead.

I'm really beginning to despair of the way the Government is handling this. On the one hand we're easing the lockdown, on the other we're now introducing restrictions which frankly are going to change our whole way of life.

Probably many of you don't use trains or buses a lot, but I do, and that's something like £500 p.a that South Western Railways are going to lose from me alone because I simply cannot be [insert word of choice here] to wear a face covering for the one and a half hour journey to go watch Woking FC or Newton Abbot Spurs. and similar on the return.

There's even talk now that they are going to trial a (mandatory) App in Newport (South Wales) to enable you to book your seat on a local bus! No booking, no travel!

[Workingman]

The inconsistency just keeps on coming ....

We did not completely shut down public transport nor have we had to wear a mask to use it, but as soon as it is safe to ease the lockdown you need a mask.

As for booking a seat on a bus via an app; give me strength! I don't know about you but when I go somewhere I do not set an exact time to come home, I just come back when I have had enough. I can think of loads of other reasons this will not work.

There are times when we jump on technology as being the answer to every problem. This app has the hallmark of somebody needing to be seen to be doing something.

[meriad]

I'll be honest, I for one do get it ... I am surprised it hasn't been compulsory beforehand, but then not many people were using trains and buses.

As lockdown eases companies are opening up again and people will start going back to work / go out shopping. Traffic will increase again so more people (me included) will go back to public transport - the drive into London is bearable when there is no traffic; but there's a hope in hell I'll do it when traffic goes back to silly levels; it'll take me 2 hours! Up until now it's been easy to keep social distancing; trains have been so empty it's been a doddle keeping the 2m distance and locally here, seats on buses have been marked, indicating which ones you can sit on and which ones you can't and many remained empty... Again; more and more people will start using public transport so the marked simply seats won't be enough; social distancing will become impossible - ergo; masks required.

Yes, people may prefer to walk or cycle instead of catching a bus, but I guarantee you the moment the weather turns and it's wet, cold, windy, rainy, snowy etc.... that bike helmet will be hung up and the bus pass hauled out.

Will it be uncomfortable, yes - but if that's what it takes to get things going again then so be it

[Kaz]

Well said Ria. I honestly don't see how the larger towns and cities can get back to any semblance of normality otherwise

[miasmum]

My friend lives and works in London Ria and she feels exactly the same. I don’t travel on public transport very often but if I did and I could keep people like her and you safe, why wouldn’t I wear a mask?

[Workingman]

But only one day ago (4th June) the government reiterated the 2 metre rules so in theory the seating distances on public transport and in shops and at work still remain. Wearing a mask does not change them.

The government is making things up as we go along, and the new things contradict the old ones. We might as well stop the pretence and just say that we are going back to normal and have done with it.

In March they were officially a waste of time, now masks are going to save us all. I give up!

[TheOstrich]

It's a bit concerning that the latest R-numbers have, compared with 2 weeks ago, jumped upwards in all parts of the country. In the north-west, it now exceeds 1.

Is this a result of the easing of the lockdown, which, let's face it, was beginning to be flouted anyway?

So accordingly, maybe this R number leap is a valid argument that face coverings should be compulsory, because as people go back to work and shops open, the potential for further increases in the R number looks highly likely.

I'm not an advocate for face masks - I've tried a simple cloth one, and felt pretty uncomfortable in it - and I'm also not convinced (either way) by the scientific arguments over them, but maybe every little helps ....

I certainly wouldn't blame anyone re-starting commuting into work for wearing one.

BBC:
Coronavirus R number 15 May 2020​ vs 5 June 2020​

NE & Yorks 0.80​ 0.89​
Midlands 0.68​ 0.90​
East 0.71​ 0.94​
London 0.40​ 0.95​
South East 0.73​ 0.97​
South West 0.76​ 1.00​
North West 0.73​ 1.01​

Source
England: Public Health England & Univ. of Cambridge

.

[Workingman]

In my view this was always the calculated risk that had to be taken at some point.

The big problem with the R number is that the true one is not known. The ones being given are from modelling with the numbers we do have from the tests done, and they are far from perfect, as Cambridge admits. Giving ranges skews them even further.

[Suff]

Added to that the lower the numbers become, the faster the R0 number raises. For instance if you only have one test case and one fails, the failure rate is 100%, if you have 100, it is 1%, etc. We have reduced from around 5,000 new cases per day where an R0 rate of 1 would require 5,000 cases per day. An R0 rate of 2 is exponential, it hits 4bn pretty quickly.

When numbers fall, as they have been, then the R0 rate is less than 1. However if it pauses for a few days, the R0 rate goes back up to 1 and if it rises then it creeps over.

So, the shorter the window, the more alarming you can make the figures. What is the month on month R0 figure for the UK? Less than one, everywhere.

Remember Germany and the hysterics? Did they lock down again? No, what are their numbers? Down and very low.

So while wearing masks may help a bit, suggesting that the R0 rate on a trailing weekly average, with a virus that has a 10 to 15 day incubation period, is a reason for wearing masks, simply doesn't make sense.

It does, however, make news, trouble in parliament and generates money.

When our monthly trailing R0 number goes up, I'll pay attention.

[Workingman]

They are further skewed in that they are a % of a%.

If you have 116,000 tests and get 5,000 positives that's 4.3%. If the R number is R=0.9 (90%) that means the 5,000 will pass it on to 3.870. if R is R=0.75 the 5,000 pass it on to 3,225 and so on down the scale.

The big problem is with the number of tests done and the absolute positives from those tests - on that day, and they change from day to day. The R number will change daily or you can get an average over a time period, say a week. Much shorter or longer and the number becomes meaningless as a control measure. We are currently waiting about 72 hours for tests on any one day being returned, so today's R number will not be known till Monday / Tuesday.

Take the London range of R0.40 - R0.95.

If 28,000 tests are done and the supposed national average of 7% come back positive that gives 1.960. Those figures mean that between 784 (R0.4) and 1,862 (R0.95) people pass the virus on. That is a huge range and nobody knows who they are or where in London they are. Test - trace and track is not up and running well enough for the granularity needed to say which parts of London are low and which are hot-spots, never mind the country.