Six simple steps for more freedom without extra risk

Although there remains considerable uncertainty over how the coronavirus is spread, there is much more evidence available to ministers than when lockdown was imposed five weeks ago.

Two findings, repeated in multiple studies, give some cause for optimism.

First, the virus does not in any meaningful sense appear to be airborne. It can be projected through the air for several metres through coughs and spittle, but it does not appear to float in tiny particles in the atmosphere for long. Second and related, indoor environments pose a much greater risk than outdoor ones.

Across studies, the estimated secondary attack rate within households varies between 10–20 per cent, with a much smaller attack rate outside homes of between 0–5 per cent. A South Korean study of a large office building suggests a similar pattern. While people sitting close together at desks on one side of a floor all picked up the virus, it left most of those on the other side of the office untouched and did not spread between floors.

All this suggests the major risk factors in the spread of the virus are, as the World Health Organisation (WHO) and others hypothesised from the outset, droplet laden surfaces and unwashed hands and sustained face-to face contact or touching.

For planners and politicians, it points to several ways in which elements of lockdown might be eased without greatly increasing the risk of the virus spreading rapidly again:

Outdoor sports and exercise

UK individuals are allowed to take one hour of exercise a day outside, but there would seem to be considerable scope for increasing this. A wide range of non-contact sports such as golf, surfing, hiking and open air swimming could almost certainly be allowed without greatly increasing the risk of transmission as long as large groups and in-door changing and gathering points can be avoided. The same can probably be said of outdoor exercise classes – things like pilates and yoga – if they are conducted in large open spaces and participants are spread out.

Ball sports like tennis or table tennis pose a slightly higher risk because of the sharing of a common object, but it is small and nonexistent if games are contained to those within a single household. Allowing a much wider range of exercise options and time for people, may also help mitigate one of the biggest single projected indirect harms of lockdown – that many people will put on weight and suffer the long-term vascular health effects of prolonged sedentary behaviour.

Day trips to the countryside and the beach

There is little evidence to suggest that outdoor activities like these will increase the spread of the virus so long as mechanisms can be found to prevent everyone converging on the same place at the same time.

Although much has been made of family groups being arrested for picnicking on beaches and downs, there is nothing inherently wrong with this other than that it is currently against the rules. As long as members of different households don’t mix and local businesses are able to operate good outdoor hygiene standards, the risks would seem fleetingly low.

The issue with all outdoor activities like these is they need the Government to provide a framework to stop them inadvertently becoming mass gatherings. While this may seem complicated it could be that there are simple mechanisms that would control it. In France for instance, the proposed exit plan places a 100km limit on

travel. Other rules might include segmenting society by odd and even house numbers or postcodes and designating them particular dates and time slots. It may sound a bit Orwellian, but if the alternative is staying in most of the time, such rules may win popular support.

Al fresco bars and restaurants

The evidence is clear that closely packed bars and restaurants are a major risk for super-spreader events. The ground zero for the spread of the virus around much of Europe is thought to have come from the crowded apres ski bars of the French and Austrian alps during the February half term school break, for example.

Yet with traffic restricted and millions working from home, there is an opportunity for the Government to allow bar and restaurant owners to provide carefully controlled outside service during the British summer without such risks. This is a model already being tested in parts of Europe traditionally more used to al fresco service. Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, is turning its public spaces into open-air cafés to give bars and restaurants a chance to reopen while respecting public health rules. More than 160 businesses have already applied for an outdoor permit.

Outdoor religious services

During the 1918 Spanish flu, San Francisco held church services in the outdoors to cut down on virus transmission. Even some legal proceedings were held outside.

In this pandemic, New York has already closed off 100 miles of roads to traffic for more walking space, and some religious groups have taken to holding services outside.

Shops and queues

The way in which many shops are operating with long queues outside and touch screens inside make little sense from a scientific standpoint. WHO’s evidence-based rules for “high risk” contacts suggest the following things are most important: people from different households don’t touch each other physically by shaking hands or kissing, for example; they don’t talk “face-to-face” for a sustained period of more than 15 minutes; they are not coughed or sneezed on; they don’t share a “closed environment” such as a small office or waiting room with someone for more than 15 minutes. The guidelines suggest shops should be paying more attention to the common surfaces that their customers