[Closed] Is social distancing done with in mountain biking?

It appears so. I was on a road ride in the Chilterns yesterday and saw loads of road and mountain bike groups.

I think the accepted wisdom is that there is very little risk of spreading the virus when outside. You can ride in groups if you are from the same household, you can also ride with one other person outside your household so riding with others is allowed, but in larger, mixed groups you would be in breach of the guidelines. I suspect it will be one of the next things to be relaxed, though. There are certainly bigger breaches to worry about than this, especially groups of three (who way not even be against the guidelines)

Up to people to make their own decisions in life.

A major viral pandemic hits the UK, killing over 32,000 and people want to congregate.

Fine, they are the example Charles Darwin was talking about. Stay clear of them.

Apparently not, went for a walk in the Forest of Dean yesterday with the dogs, across the top of Sallowvallets (top end of Verderers) and Cannop Ponds area there were several groups of blokes riding close together and congregating in groups for a chat mid/post ride like nothing has happened, and really didn't give a crap that other people were about and giving them looks/a wide berth.

There was a big group of 8-10 at Swinely yesterday (by random conincidence Im sure, on E-bikes).

Seemed to generally be stopping 2m appart but still.......

I guess people will all interpret the rules is slightly different ways.

Im sticking with my interpretation of the rules, and Im sure there's someone who thinks 5 hours solo on the bike yesterday was taking the piss by their interpretation.

I wish these threads were done with. Or is the new normal even more judgemental than the old one?

Other people behave differently from you. Get over it.

That's all well and good Spin, but it is a fairly deadly global pandemic.

I think this is indicative of the confusion the latest set of 'guidelines' has created.

Added to that having that ****wit Cummings doing what he likes with what appears to be the full support of the ruling classes then I can fully understand why they're getting together for rides.

I did think that you could meet one person from outside your household for exercise outside provided you remained 2metres apart but more than that was a no-no but what do I know?

That’s all well and good Spin, but it is a fairly deadly global pandemic.

That hadn't passed me by but I think it's past time people stopped sharing their outrage at others behaviour. We established quite early on that not everyone is behaving the same way and moaning about it isn't going to help.

I think the accepted wisdom is that there is very little risk of spreading the virus when outside.

Accepted? Wisdom ? It seems to be what people want to hear so I suppose so.
Who gives a toss for science any more if it's politically expedient not to?

I think this is indicative of the confusion the latest set of ‘guidelines’ has created.

Latest?

There was a big group of 8-10 at Swinely yesterday (by random conincidence Im sure, on E-bikes).

Seemed to generally be stopping 2m appart but still…….

What has 2m got to do with it? Is this a magic number?

Riding behind someone 1/4 sec behind them through woodland you might as well forget 2m when you stop.

@spin

That hadn’t passed me by but I think it’s past time people stopped sharing their outrage at others behaviour. We established quite early on that not everyone is behaving the same way and moaning about it isn’t going to help.

So yesterday someone posted on FB that some bastard had refused their help when they tried to touch them. The general consensus was either kick them in the head or throw the bike off a cliff or both.

So yesterday someone posted on FB that some bastard had refused their help when they tried to touch them. The general consensus was either kick them in the head or throw the bike off a cliff or both.

Is there more to this than 'some people are pricks'?

A major viral pandemic hits the UK, killing over 32,000 and people want to congregate.

Yeah, but it's not really killing that many healthy people who congregate outdoors and might on occasions be closer than 2m is it?
Although I've not myself broken that particular rule, I'm happy to admit I've assessed risk and broken other lockdown rules recently as we are very far removed from where we were before the lockdown started.

Is there more to this than ‘some people are pricks’?

Depending on your take... the OP was just asking to be fair after he didn't ask them before going to take the bike off them on what was described as a farm track.

The person who'd crashed was fully conscious and ended up shouting at them to stay back.

A good 80%? of the posts were between throw his bike off the cliff or give the ungrateful (assumed) roady a good kicking shouldn't be riding if they can't not crash.

Almost no-one thought they had a right to turn down assistance.

Very very disturbing... as it was "most" not "some"

That thread I think wasn't the refusal. It was how it was refused...

Personally on ones travels it appears more people have gotten bored of the rules and then compound that with the likes of DC being a dick they're more inclined to say sod it.

However everyone loves judging others. It's great fun.

Depending on your take…

I think the story there is as much about people being frightened as people being dicks.

I wish these threads were done with.

I agree totally with Spin. Loads of these threads. Why not take your mock outrage to Twitter where you can get stroked better by the like minded.

mock outrage? where?

Fine, they are the example Charles Darwin was talking about. Stay clear of them.

Darwin never discussed any such nonsense. Natural selection / survival of the fittest presumes that:

- "nature" decides not the individuals;
- the premise is that for "good genes" to be passed on and "bad ones" to be discontinued, that means any 'bad actions' by an individual after they have bred are not selective (unless they directly harm their own offspring);
- the consequences of a poor gene (e.g. being a **** who goes on group rides in close proximity to others) is felt most by the holder of that gene - or its entire species: i.e. its perfectly "Darwinian" that some poor genetics wipe out the entire human race (or do so in certain ecosystems/geographies).

Saying "Natural Selection" will sort them out, is a bit like the Herd Immunity plan and is not far off Eugenics. Medically fit people survive whilst those who have underlying health issues either die of the illness or from not being able to access the health services they need.

Yeah, but it’s not really killing that many healthy people who congregate outdoors and might on occasions be closer than 2m is it?

Therein lies the problem. It not about person A giving the virus to person B and C who then die (although some will even if normally fit and healthy!). Its about person B and C then unknowingly giving the virus to person D,E,F and G who then give it to H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O and about person X,Y and Z being unable to access their normal medical care (cancer screening, chemotherapy, transplant surgery are all but stopped, because the NHS doesn't have capacity and the relative benefits are less than the risks when the disease is prevalent).

@poly - clearly I'm aware of that, but the transmission risk within a group of mountain bikers out for a ride on Sunday must be pretty small in the first place, no?

duncancallum

That thread I think wasn’t the refusal. It was how it was refused…

In all reality how else could he have refused?

You don't have time for a polite conversation...as I personally realised.

I had a "helpful" delivery guy who I tried to be polite with. I was in the garage with the door open when he arrived and I cheerfully asked if he'd leave the delivery there "just leave it there please" ... he kept going .. "please stop" , "oh I'll just put it in the garage for you" by which point he was quite literally almost in... I ended up shouting him out of his autopilot being helpful...

Yeah, but it’s not really killing that many healthy people who congregate outdoors and might on occasions be closer than 2m is it?

Whoosh… that’s the sound of the point of distancing measures flying over someone’s head.

clearly I’m aware of that, but the transmission risk within a group of mountain bikers out for a ride on Sunday must be pretty small in the first place, no?

Why would breathing in what someone exhaled 1/4 sec ago be safe? It might be perfectly safe to you... but as Poly said...^

However the biggest danger is people just assuming "the transmission risk within a group of mountain bikers out for a ride on Sunday must be pretty small in the first place". Anyone in that group might be H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O or they may live with H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O or X,Y or Z

I've not seen a government rule that say's not to share a waterbottle so long as you don't go within 2m to hand it to the person. Hopefully it's common sense ?

Added to that having that **** Cummings doing what he likes with what appears to be the full support of the ruling classes then I can fully understand why they’re getting together for rides.

I couldn't care what Cummings has done or who thinks what is safe or okay to do, personally I am not about to take risks by congregating in groups like that - why take the risk?

Was out on a walk in my local woods on a public footpath, the other day and a group of four bikers came past, id thought I would have some fun and exclaimed “enjoy your rule breaking” to which the reply was “well we are 2m apart”.

I then had great pleasure in pointing out it was a footpath...

If you night ride with head torches, it’s amazing how (you can see) if someone ahead of you spits sideways, what a huge cloud of tiny droplets is visible in the air and how, if you were 5m behind, you ride through it.

You can’t see it in daylight, but it’s obviously there, just the same. Based on that, I’d suggest 10m wouldn’t be safe if riding behind someone at 20mph on the road.

Premier Icon
Dickyboy
Subscriber

@poly – clearly I’m aware of that, but the transmission risk within a group of mountain bikers out for a ride on Sunday must be pretty small in the first place, no?

Dickyboy feel free to back that up with some peer reviewed data if you want. Otherwise it seems like a bunch of people exercising heavily in close proximity to each other for a long period of time with little access to good hygiene facilities would seem to be some risk factors involved: you are breathing faster so presumably inhale a larger dose, you are breathing deeper so potentially get the dose deeper into the respiratory tract, you are sweating so likely to touch/rub face/eyes, “sunday riders” quite likely to cough and splutter on the climbs.

My run this morning took me for a bit onto the South Downs Way and there were a good few groups out, far more in fact than I've seen before in 35+ years I've lived here. On the positive there were a lot of family groups out cycling which in the past was a very rare site up there. So yes plenty of groups stretching the rules but also a whole new group of people just discovering how great riding off road is and what a great place they live in.

@spin

I think the story there is as much about people being frightened as people being dicks.

It's about why some people are frightened and others can't afford to get the virus and why some people can't understand that.

My brother for instance has quit his job to take care of our octagenarian mother with multiple auto-immune diseases. If he even thinks he might be infected all that is for nothing.

Perhaps you think my mother shouldn't be scared to go back into the nursing home we took her out of at the beginning of February when it became obvious tens of thousands were going to die in UK nursing homes?

You can ride in groups if you are from the same household, you can also ride with one other person outside your household so riding with others is allowed

2m rule still applies when meeting up with "other person".

Out on a popular local roadie route this morning, didn't see anyone obviously breaching the guidelines - a few non household pairs out 2m plus apart, most pairs obviously households.

Nice social distancing at the cafe as well.

Most of the people dying are over 70.

Transmission is primarily by droplets from infectious people *indoors*.

Me cycling around with my mates, outside, none of us have it, the risk is practically zero.

Risk of being killed by a car is considerably higher.

Plus, Dominic Cummings.

2m rule still applies when meeting up with “other person”.

Has anyone suggested otherwise? Also I think it would be pretty hard to ride less than 2m from someone unless you are pootling (or a roadie)

Me cycling around with my mates, outside, none of us have it, the risk is practically zero.

This statement can only be true if you are certain that all of your mates, or people they live with, have had no outside contact outside their household for weeks. Recently a test of an entire care home and it's workers showed that roughly 1/5 unknowingly had the virus and were asymptomatic...going forward we're going to have to put a lot of faith in asymptomatic 'transmission' not being so big an issue in assessing risk. The risk is likely to be a long way from zero in any group situation. If you have to do it...best spin like billy'o to be at the front of the pack, and no chest bumps.

Me cycling around with my mates, outside, none of us have it, the risk is practically zero.

Possibly correct, but unless none of you have had any contact with anyone or anything else for 3 weeks, you have no way of knowing for sure that you haven't got it and can't pass it on.

Though I accept that as we move further out of lockdown, we may all have to make that kind of best guess on our social contacts

Once again, a group of people riding around outside, if they chose to accept the small increase in risk, then I no longer see any issue, certainly something I’m not going to let bother me.

And compared to pretty much any coastal town, today being Poole, Christchurch & Bournmouth where the towns are ‘very’ busy - maybe not half term busy, but certainly a serious lack of social distancing going on, as most people are sat on (closed) pub tables, having all brought their own beers, having a mass piss up in the sun.

A few guys on bikes, don’t even register on the scale of issues.

Ones personal feelings on this are irrelevant.

Me cycling around with my mates, outside, none of us have it, the risk is practically zero.

Wow you and your mates all got tested today and got the results back?

Once again, a group of people riding around outside, if they chose to accept the small increase in risk, then I no longer see any issue, certainly something I’m not going to let bother me.

likewise, i struggle to get too wound up about it, however it's important to acknowledge that they're making the decision on the small increase in risk not only for themselves, but for everyone else they come in to contact with. we'll find out in a few weeks what the effects of these decisions are.

however it’s important to acknowledge that they’re making the decision on the small increase in risk not only for themselves, but for everyone else they come in to contact with

THIS is the whole point.

the premise is that for “good genes”

Darwin didnt know about genes.

a_a depends what you mean by know about genes? Genetics as a science and even as a word was not known but he did understand the concept of heritable variability which is what we (in 2020) are getting at with “good genes” he had no idea of the mechanism but the concept that parents pass on features to their children was understood.

Most of the people dying are over 70.

Transmission is primarily by droplets from infectious people *indoors*.

Me cycling around with my mates, outside, none of us have it, the risk is practically zero.

Risk of being killed by a car is considerably higher.

Plus, Dominic Cummings.

So Cummings is stupid, and Boris isn’t brave enough to fire him so you think it’s ok to kill 70 year olds (just for your info - whilst most people who die are 70+ it’s certainly nowhere near all). I’d say your risk of being killed by a car mountain biking must be close to zero?

I’m not sure how you know that most infections are indoors (are you trusting the same govt that won’t sack Cummings? Or are you biasing your data from the fact that most prolonged interactions have been indoors)?

I’ve no idea how you could know that none of your friends have the virus? Presumably it’s some sort of similar psychic power than means that you know none of them will will have contact with anyone over 70 (or who in turn will have contact with anyone over 70).

I’m not sure how you know that most infections are indoors

This is the classic report:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1

No one seems to have done anything similar in the UK.

so you think it’s ok to kill 70 year olds

National over-reacting week again.

I’ve no idea how you could know that none of your friends have the virus?

I can look at the infection rates in the UK as a whole (thankyou ONS). Something like 0.25% of the population are infected. I would need to go on a bike ride with about 400 people. Indoors.

So Cummings is stupid, and Boris isn’t brave enough to fire him

Or perhaps this is the kind of behaviour they are expecting of us?

Perhaps you think my mother shouldn’t be scared to go back into the nursing home we took her out of at the beginning of February when it became obvious tens of thousands were going to die in UK nursing homes?

I think you've misunderstood me. I was suggesting that sometimes people's fear leads them to behave in a way that could be interpreted as being a dick. I think both bits of that equation are understandable and that it probably explains the incident with someone rejecting help you mentioned upthread.

Groups of 5 and one of 10 in the wyre forest today 😟

don't see a problem with 3/4/5 strong groups, we all think we're much more likely to catch/spread it working on site as distancing is much harder/impossible to do.

i would think on a 3 hour ride we would probably only spend a minute or 2 closer to someone than 2M so vertually no risk.

It can't be that bad if NI are allowing groups of six outside. Lets all stop panicking shall we for seeing a few MTBers togethers, plus MTBing has nothing to do with it - plenty of walkers breaking the +1 rule.

As mentioned its widely accepted by scientists based on other similar viruses that outdoor exposure drastically limits the spreading of this virus.

Move on.

Yeah, but it’s not really killing that many healthy people who congregate outdoors and might on occasions be closer than 2m is it?

Indeed hopefully not. But what could be happening is those fit healthy outdoorsey types can carry the virus, and pass it alone to someone who it would likely seriously affect. Might even be a week till they feel even remotely unwell or with the lightest of symptoms.
But until symptoms present themselves if at all those people are capable of carrying and passing it on.
Thats the worry especially as death rate has fallen significantly indicating new infections are or were a month ago low.
What we now need is to see a serious decline in infections, knowing that from those infected a percentage wont survive and we'll have that rate for as long as the infections remain steady or then drop, and subsequently a month or so from that time the death rate will also drop significantly then I would expect to stop abruptly. Well hopefully abruptly.

Have you ever caught an old-skool cold while out cycling with a few friends?

Or did you catch all those colds by going to a crowded pub, or sitting on a crowded train, or teaching a class of sniffly kids?

@spin

I think you’ve misunderstood me. I was suggesting that sometimes people’s fear leads them to behave in a way that could be interpreted as being a dick. I think both bits of that equation are understandable and that it probably explains the incident with someone rejecting help you mentioned upthread.

Sort of .... I think my original point is/was on two other levels.
1) Assumption that anyone (under 80 ish) who doesn't "want" to catch CV is a dick
2) Inability to see that if someone doesn't want to be infected you should respect that

If you start off with an assumption the crashed guy really doesn't want CV for whatever reasons and respect that then the crashed rider really had no other choice but shout. It's not a situation you have time for 20 questions.

What greatly concerns me is that overwhelmingly from that thread most can't get past #1.

This then leads to:

i would think on a 3 hour ride we would probably only spend a minute or 2 closer to someone than 2M so vertually no risk.

I really can't even begin...

Lets all stop panicking shall we for seeing a few MTBers togethers, plus MTBing has nothing to do with it – plenty of walkers breaking the +1 rule.

As mentioned its widely accepted by scientists based on other similar viruses that outdoor exposure drastically limits the spreading of this virus.

.. cycling behind someone for 1/2 hour or more?
.. like magic tennis balls and magic footballs..

It can’t be that bad if NI are allowing groups of six outside.

??? You think the virus changes behaviour as it crosses the border?

oldnpastit

Have you ever caught an old-skool cold while out cycling with a few friends?

Or did you catch all those colds by going to a crowded pub, or sitting on a crowded train, or teaching a class of sniffly kids?

Certainly not ALL ... but what exactly do you mean by catching a cold?
I personally rarely get colds developing, once a decade on average I'll have more than 1/2d of sniffles and headache.
As far as I know I've not had flu ever in 50+yrs...

I've almost certainly carried the virus and passed it to others though.

The government could resolve all these questions at a stroke by funding some research into (say) a thousand cases and tracking where they all picked up their infection.

Then we would *know* how often people get it from cycling in groups, or going to school, or sitting on an underground train, or whatever.

For whatever reason this hasn't happened in this country.

The government could resolve all these questions at a stroke by funding some research into (say) a thousand cases and tracking where they all picked up their infection.

Then we would *know* how often people get it from cycling in groups, or going to school, or sitting on an underground train, or whatever.

Or they could simply use the existing studies carried out elsewhere ... at least whilst they carry out their own... though quite how you'd get reliable results unless you completely controlled everything else I don't know. How do you seperate a teacher who went to a supermarket after school then went cycling for a week plus until they have something to actually test?

For whatever reason this hasn’t happened in this country.

Hiding the results would be very difficult and the results woulds almost certainly not allow them to continue the current herd immunity by stealth approach.

??? You think the virus changes behaviour as it crosses the border?

Exactly the point Einstein.. why is it OK there and not here.

The Dutch and Belgian study that you may have read about exercising was largely debunked with quite a few flaws.

Exactly the point Einstein.. why is it OK there and not here.

What's do you mean by OK?
This is the real problem... not just for MTB but every aspect of life with CV.
It's not a binary ... each country has sets of measures to reduce infections but these are not specific. In the UK and NI we have 4 sets .. the ROI another etc. but

The Dutch and Belgian study that you may have read about exercising was largely debunked with quite a few flaws.

I'm not referring to any specific study.
Back to binary .. you are free to go out with a mate who can also go out with a mate and you are free to share waterbottles so long as you leave it on the ground and don't go within 2m of each other. I haven't seen a law prohibits this ... just as trail centres in the UK have signs telling you to stay 2m apart.
I haven't seen a study where travelling through the exhaled breath of someone with a 1/4 second gap has shown this to be "safe" and more than a study saying why tennis balls can't carry CV or sharing a water bottle or a joint is OK so long as you stay 2m apart when passing it.

Yes, the 2m rule is only relevant when people are stationary, so riding at speed 2-3m behind someone is obviously a problem.

NI can have different rules because they have made a different risk assessment. That may be based on the much lower prevalence of disease, or rates of transmission (R), or simply politics.

I worry about the perception of the general public thinking cyclists / MTBers are entitled pricks. When many people are going to great effort to keep themselves isolated, it is galling to see people who think the rules (however sensible / non-sensical you may feel they are) are being ignored. There is a lot of talk about cycling (and sport in general) being part of the 'new normal' which is great. But at the same time there's a lot of people making us look like morons.

I went on a solo ride where I (slowly) caught another riding duo. It would have looked like we were riding as a threesome. I felt weirdly self-conscious until I could distance them.

I worry about the perception of the general public thinking cyclists / MTBers are entitled pricks.

You may well be right, and given they already think that it would be wise not to provide them with any more ammo.

It's definitely not just cyclists though. It seems to have become the norm in all walks of life now. I'm not sure people really know what the rules are any more.

I dont think its just mountain bikers who are congregating. We  up in the Peak District yesterday and saw numerous group of 6 to 10 people all of the same sex so highly unlikely to be a single household. Other groups were clearly 2 or more families out for the day.

What’s do you mean by OK?

Steve, all 4 nations are advised by the same group - SAGE. So again why has NI moved forward with larger group allowance than England. I'd also add that Outdoor markets will be allowed from the 1st June, thats certainly going to be a crowded affair.

You have to remember there are other factors here at play than just the science, like politics.

The choice of gathering with one person or 6 people is irrelevant when social distancing is maintained when outdoors, the risk remains the same - virtually zero chance of infection due to environmental factors as is well documented.

Similarly look at our fellow European countries and what they've been doing since the middle/early parts of May - the infection rate hasn't increased so we have some precedent to show that the risk of smallish spaced out outdoor interactions does not cause an influx of infection.

Yes, the 2m rule is only relevant when people are stationary, so riding at speed 2-3m behind someone is obviously a problem.

Except that 2m is an outlier anyway. In plenty of other countries, the 'safe' distance is 1m or 1.5m (Germany I think). All the stuff I've read on viral transmission suggests that the biggest risk is indoors - offices, restaurants, public transport, where people are subjected to exhaled virus globs for extended periods of time.

Also some really interesting stuff on humidity. Apparently the high transmission in ski resorts wasn't down to chalets or bars predominately, but ski lifts where skiers were packed together in bubbles, globes and telecabines. Low temperatures meant humidity rapidly rises to close to 100% and, in turn, larger exhaled globules of viral matter remain suspended in the air far longer than they would in a drier environment. Cue inhalation of lots of virus and rapid spread. The inference for shops and offices is that reducing humidity is an important step in minimising spread. Or so my mate who is brighter and better connected than me and runs an office says.

I'm certainly not saying any of this means people should ride bikes in groups, personally I choose not to - or would do if I weren't convalescing in a hammock - but it's likely to be relatively low risk behaviour. I always thought skiing was evil 🙂

ps: assuming what has wiped me out for the last 11 weeks is covid-19 - waiting for antibody test result, but had loads of the obvious symptoms - you really don't want the long-tail recovery version of this thing, no matter how fit and healthy you might be.

Yes, the 2m rule is only relevant when people are stationary, so riding at speed 2-3m behind someone is obviously a problem.

Obviously?

Not sure it is really. Before SteveXTC jumps down my throat again I don't condone riding in pairs/groups, I think it's an unessecary risk. But I dont think its as bad as some of the moraly superior beings on this thread are making it out to be.

Indoors you breath is going to hang arround in the air untill any droplets fall to the floor or get diluted to the point of no significant risk, hence a ~2m radius is fairly easy to visualise how that works, you can see your breath on a cold day, it doesnt travel very far.

Riding a bike at 10mph thats 5m/s, so while there is probably a plume of breath behind you, its being mixed with several cubic meters of turbulent air every second.

Which has more virus particles, some stagnant air thats been breathed in and out for 15 minutes (the guidelines) or 2l of breath diluted into ~5m3 of turbulent air? Even before any breeze effect carries it away at an angle.

The trouble with the virus is that you can have it, and be asymptomatic and contagious, which is scary. So you wont know your ill and spread it.

Also it's not just over 80's. Plenty of people with well controlled health issues have died as a result of catching it.

I personally think groups are a bit too soon and can't be doing much for our image, reading how busy Surrey Hills was and car parks more than full... And any goodwill we had is disappearing quickly.

There's still more infections and deaths occurring than when the lockdown started.

This is the classic report:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1

Have you actually read that (not yet peer reviewed) paper?
It only looks at "outbreaks" with multiple infections from a single "index patient".

If I've understood their data correctly 80% of the cases were transmission within a household, not exactly surprising, but it does mean there's not a huge amount of data on the "more interesting" inter-household transmissions.

Their own discussion notes, "Indoors is where our lives and work are in modern civilisation." That is subtle but important, its highlighting that there is a bias in the data, which shouldn't be inferred to say that outdoors is intrinsically safer, rather that since people spend most of their time indoors, there are more infections indoors. Its a bit like saying most car accidents happen on roads. Moreover they note, "Our study does not rule out outdoor transmission of the virus." and go on to explain that a large part of the study included periods where there were restrictions on movement in place ("lockdown").

No one seems to have done anything similar in the UK.

Not really surprising. Firstly, they have data going back to the start of the year, and submitted this in April. Secondly, they have much more rigorous case data in China (rightly or wrongly) - and even they note inconsistencies in the detail behind each case.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that risk isn't lower outside, but be very cautious about inferring indoor/outdoor risk from studies with bias on how much indoor/outdoor exposure there was, and even more cautious about assuming that a group of people riding in close proximity to each other is comparable to "outdoor risk" - because any studies that do come along for outdoor risk are unlikely to test or model those scenarios, v's passing interaction, brief conversation, and outdoors following social interaction - or at the other extreme crowded beaches, sports venues and music festivals. I'd also be very cautious about inferring data from different regions, because the virus doesn't change its behaviour but people do, environmental conditions are different (even seasonally) and hygiene behaviours like coughing, spitting, wearing masks will all vary too.

I’ve no idea how you could know that none of your friends have the virus?

I can look at the infection rates in the UK as a whole (thankyou ONS). Something like 0.25% of the population are infected. I would need to go on a bike ride with about 400 people. Indoors.

You see that is the problem with the ONS publishing data, people will take it and manipulate it to suit their underlying bias/belief. What that data tells you is that you can't know that none of your friends are infected. It may be relatively unlikely, but the thing about very unlikely things is they happen all the time (otherwise nobody would win the lottery, premium bonds etc). Even if we apply your logic to the scenario lets say 4 riders in a group, then if 100 groups went out on Sunday, then one of them just became a new outbreak cluster - we've no way to predict who, until those people start to display symptoms. Assuming asymptomatic transmission is a real problem they've then infected another 4*N people by the end of the week, and by the end of the following week they in turn infected 4N^2 repeat for all similar activities, and groups and suddenly its spiralling out of control. Or we could not ride in groups, and avoid the problem...

mountain bikers, walkers, people in general are not following the guidelines/rules.

I guess from a personal level, what annoys me is when I have gone to the effort of following the rules, and others choose not to or feel that they don't apply to them.

I do wonder if when the government set out all these rules etc that there is some 'contingency' in them, knowing that a large chunk of people wont follow them.

mountain bikers, walkers, people in general are not following the guidelines/rules.

This is the situation I've observed over the weekend, with a big uptick in people basically not giving a shit yesterday eve.

Mostly walkers and motorists meeting in groups though, relatively few MTBers despite the fine weather and sunshine.

It's almost as if something's happened that's made people think "oh well, sod it then". No idea what that could have been.

Mr Pea and I avoided the bank hol crowds yesterday by setting off for a ride at 4am. Saw the sun rise, had a great ride in beautiful weather, home by 8am.

No one else gives a shit now, walkers, families, etc.

I may bend the rules now but still very small group and we've all been self isolating or solo riding for months and don't come into contact with others. We don't interact with others on rides, although have to make some effort to avoid other people walking who don't care.

Common sense used. CumGate has told us we can just apply our own logic and common sense apparently and should have all along.

How do you seperate a teacher who went to a supermarket after school then went cycling for a week plus until they have something to actually test?

By using multivariate statistics in a big study with lots of data, hard to do but not imposdible.

Out on a walk yesterday and it was busy with folk everywhere. Can hardly blame them, it's been hard going for everyone and the "rules" seem to be easing... Most people were trying to be sensible as far I could see, I saw family groups,  a couple of groups of mountain bikers, and every-one seemed to be able to rub along.

CumGate

Is that an OTT reaction to the "how do you open gates" thread?

I think the accepted wisdom is that there is very little risk of spreading the virus when outside.

Yes, this is my reading of the evidence. see below for a good summary from 'an expert'. No contact is without risk but mountain biking in small groups and keeping some reasonable distance when you stop seems a very low risk activity to me.

What has 2m got to do with it? Is this a magic number?

Riding behind someone 1/4 sec behind them through woodland you might as well forget 2m when you stop.

Why would breathing in what someone exhaled 1/4 sec ago be safe?

This piece explains it pretty well - it’s from a professor of epidemiology, so has some credence

This seems quite informative in tackling the assertion that cycling is dangerous because you get close to other people at times.

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

"In order to get infected you need to get exposed to an infectious dose of the virus; based on infectious dose studies with MERS and SARS (and this one), some estimate that as few as 1000 SARS-CoV2 viral particles are needed for an infection to take hold. Please note, this still needs to be determined experimentally, but we can use that number to demonstrate how infection can occur. Infection could occur, through 1000 viral particles you receive in one breath or from one eye-rub, or 100 viral particles inhaled with each breath over 10 breaths, or 10 viral particles with 100 breaths. Each of these situations can lead to an infection

"The exposure to virus x time formula is the basis of contact tracing. Anyone you spend greater than 10 minutes with in a face-to-face situation is potentially infected. Anyone who shares a space with you (say an office) for an extended period is potentially infected. :
...
Indoor spaces, with limited air exchange or recycled air and lots of people, are concerning from a transmission standpoint.
…
If you are sitting in a well ventilated space, with few people, the risk is low.
….
If I am outside, and I walk past someone, remember it is “dose and time” needed for infection. You would have to be in their airstream for 5+ minutes for a chance of infection. While joggers may be releasing more virus due to deep breathing, remember the exposure time is also less due to their speed."

I like how we're all sofa-epidemiologists now. chance of getting covid is probably higher going to buy food than going on a group ride, maybe even much higher, still possible tho and gonna be a huge kick in the plums if you do end up spreading it between yourselves and potentially everyone you go near.

You need to buy food, you don't need to ride with a bunch of other people, you can make the choice and most of us have probably bent the rules in some way so we probably shouldn't judge you for it, but you can't justify it with "there's minimal risk"

b33k34

If I am outside, and I walk past someone, remember it is “dose and time” needed for infection. You would have to be in their airstream for 5+ minutes for a chance of infection. While joggers may be releasing more virus due to deep breathing, remember the exposure time is also less due to their speed.”

I'm all with that up to ....

but mountain biking in small groups and keeping some reasonable distance when you stop seems a very low risk activity to me.

The first part seems to be the actual definition of mountain biking or group riding?
You sit behind or in front of someone for 5+ minutes... a very moderate 11.8 mph is 5ms-1 or you breath in what someone just breathed/coughed out a second ago if you keep 5m apart... or 2 seconds at 10m apart (etc.) obviously a fair bit of the time most of us are going at least double that speed... and group road riding ???

I do wonder if when the government set out all these rules etc that there is some ‘contingency’ in them, knowing that a large chunk of people wont follow them.

I read somewhere that gov were surprised just how compliant the general population were during initial lockdown..

I guess from a personal level, what annoys me is when I have gone to the effort of following the rules, and others choose not to or feel that they don’t apply to them.

I believe that is what is now known as the Cummings Defense.

The first part seems to be the actual definition of mountain biking or group riding?
You sit behind or in front of someone for 5+ minutes… a very moderate 11.8 mph is 5ms-1 or you breath in what someone just breathed/coughed out a second ago if you keep 5m apart… or 2 seconds at 10m apart (etc.) obviously a fair bit of the time most of us are going at least double that speed… and group road riding ???

Except you don't really do you?

As I pointed out, your breathing roughly every second. A couple of litres of air, into your wake, assume your wake is about 1m2 then that's a dilution factor of 1:2500, and you're not going to be within those few bike lengths of your mate very often. On a climb you're more likely to be side by side, on a descent you'l leave a gap so their mincing doesn't ruin your flow.

It's still greater than zero risk, but I'm not convinced it's actually as bad as half the recreational stuff we're now allowed to do like cafe's open for takeaway coffee / cake / ice cream mid ride.

Oh so the majority of people who have died are over 70, well that's alright then. But it isn't, because these over 70's are someones much loved family member.

Having seen a friend (you know who you are) who is very fit, healthy and still young trying to recover from C19 after many, many weeks - trust me none of you want to catch this virus.

This riding in large groups, or smaller groups, who don't live together or who aren't obeying the rules has been going on since day 1.

I decided to stop riding the local trails (which I've done for over 20 years) because they are too narrow to pass safely, mtbers treat them as though they are a trail centre. Also every one in the area has discovered them and is walking or riding them, even the really secret bits.