Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
There is persistent and increasing evidence that people in a pub environment allow essential things like social distancing and hand hygiene to slip once alcohol starts to come into the equation, and we also know that staff are powerless to enforce compliance. We can keep ignoring that and pretending that this is not the case, that there's no difference between pubs and bars and other places where precautions can be taken, but it would take a lot to convince me that it isn't largely cognitive dissonance from people who don't want it to be the case. It's not that non-essential retail, or cafes, theatres, museums are more worthwhile than pubs but the question is "worthwhile vs risk". If people were getting too relaxed, letting their guard down, getting physically close and forgetting to wash their hands after three pints at the museum then yes that would be a problem too but it isn't the case. It IS the case in pubs whether people like that or not. It is the case whether you and your friends are being careful or not. A large enough proportion of patrons are letting the protective measures slip and that's enough.
|
where is the evidence for people not social distancing in pubs? or is it something that is being assumed to fit a narrative?
There is hard evidence of people not social distancing when visiting others homes, and action has been taken on that.
Just to put it in perspective, I last visited a pub at Christmas, and the time before that was the previous Christmas, so I have no invested interest in pubs being open, but I don't think they should be singled out for negative treatment unless there is hard evidence that pubs are causing a problem and 2 pubs closing is not evidence.