Origin of 6 feet apart for social distancing?

[The_Librarian]

The WHO recommends 1m
Most of Europe uses 1.5m
The US uses 6ft.

I think the idea is you have to stay further away from other people than you normally would. If you have to use a tape measure you’re doing it wrong.

[wolfpup]

@The_Librarian

The WHO recommends 1m

I had to check this and, surprisingly, it’s correct. I have always heard 2m or 6 ft and all the social distancing markers in and outside stores are at least that far apart, and many people are staying back even further. The article I cited in the previous post about droplets from a cough being able to travel more than 2 meters suggests that the WHO guideline to “maintain at least 1m (3 ft) from someone who is coughing or sneezing” is ridiculous. If someone around me was coughing or sneezing (and wasn’t wearing a mask) I’d get the hell out of there. 1m away from someone coughing up a storm? I wouldn’t want to be in the same county!

[Larry_Borgia]

@RickJay

Six feet / 2 metres was selected, I suspect, because it’s just a distance most people can understand and eyeball. More is probably better,** but it’s hard to visually figure out what 10 or 15 feet is**, and if you ask people to do difficult things they often won’t do them at all. Six is also practical to apply in situations 10-15 would not be.

Some Chicago humor I saw on FB. “It’s recommended that you stay about 10 feet away from each other. If you’re having trouble visualizing 10 feet picture a Bears wide receiver and then picture where Trubisky actually threw the pass. That distance is approximately 10 feet.”

[nelliebly]

I’d stick with the 6 feet rule. Here’s why: The WHO recommendation is based on a 1930’s study on TB by a Harvard researcher, who found that droplets from sneezes and coughs landed within 3 feet of the point where they’re expelled.

Enter the SARS epidemic in 2003. Scientists found, as stated upthread, that the droplets traveled six feet, not three. That appears to be the reason for the CDC’s 6 feet recommendation.

But those are droplets. What about aerosols?

And previous work has suggested that everyone emits some potentially infectious material when speaking or singing. Lydia Bourouiba, the scientist who studies fluid dynamics at MIT, has done work that shows that coughs and sneezes can be projected with such force that they emit both droplets and aerosols capable of traveling between 23 and 27 feet. But none of this has been demonstrated in a lab with SARS-CoV-2 in particular.

Asthe article notes, with so much uncertainty, we can get only guidelines, not hard and fast rules.

Which is likely why, even though six feet is a good guideline, it’s not wise to walk right up to it, literally speaking. Given the devastation of this pandemic, it’s best to give your neighbors as wide a berth as possible.

Hope this helps.

[Ravenman]

@Dr.Drake

I feel like this is kind of directed at me, in an unfriendly and unhelpful way. I mentioned the difference because I’m interested in how they came up with the number in the first place, not because I’m confused about significant digits.

Look, maybe I’m just having a bad day, but I really don’t enjoy being put down. By all means fight my ignorance if you think I’m misunderstanding something, but please at least try to be decent about it.

I think the point being made is that literally nobody would conduct their lives differently if the CDC issued guidance for six feet of distancing versus maintaining six feet and 7 inches of distancing. However, there are some people who think in terms of meters, therefore rounding off to 2 meters again means literally nothing as compared to a recommendation of 1.8 meters.

When you wrote that you were asking questions about precise measurements in a thread about precise measurements, that probably egged on some snark because literally nobody is saying that 6 feet or it’s metric equivalent is a precise measurement. Everyone has been saying that it is a very imprecise measurement, because it’s an effort to give a loose guideline for an appropriate distance, but also that the science shows there’s nothing magical about 6 feet, because there are so many variables in play.

[Dr.Drake]

@Ravenman

When you wrote that you were asking questions about precise measurements in a thread about precise measurements, that probably egged on some snark because literally nobody is saying that 6 feet or it’s metric equivalent is a precise measurement. Everyone has been saying that it is a very imprecise measurement, because it’s an effort to give a loose guideline for an appropriate distance, but also that the science shows there’s nothing magical about 6 feet, because there are so many variables in play.

Thanks. This is helpful: I think poor communication on my part + bad day.

[Larry_Borgia]

I’m maintaining a precise four cubit distance.

[RioRico]

@Larry_Borgia

I’m maintaining a precise four cubit distance.

I might expect some non-insane (if any) fundamentalist holy guys to recommend this.

[Sage_Rat]

Mythbusters test. From the footage, it is hard to tell how far the majority of everything went on the sheet but the cloud of mist in front of his face does seem to peter out around the 6 foot mark.

MythBusters - Art of the Sneeze | Flu Fiction

[BigT]

@Dr.Drake

Thanks. This is helpful: I think poor communication on my part + bad day.

I would not agree. Your communication was fine–we understood what you meant. What failed was the snark, which is supposed to be amusing. Otherwise focusing on a single word when the intended meaning is clear is bad communication on the other side.

Don’t beat yourself up over other people not replying in the most conducive manner.