Experts have just reported flaws in an important WHO-commissioned study into the risks of coronavirus infection, and they are saying that it should not be used as evidence for relaxing the 2-meter physical distancing rule.
The Guardian just revealed that critics of the distancing advice, claiming that people should keep at least 2 meters apart, believe it is too cautious.
“They seized on the research commissioned by the WHO, which suggested a reduction from 2 meters to 1 would raise infection risk only marginally, from 1.3% to 2.6%,” according to the online publication.
The findings are not reliable enough
On the other hand, it’s been revealed that experts who delved into the work have found mistakes that they believe are undermining the findings to the point that they are not reliable when scientists and ministers are forming judgments about what is a safe physical distancing.
“The analysis of infection risk at 1 meter versus 2 meters should be treated with great caution,” according to Prof David Spiegelhalter, who is a statistician at Cambridge University. It’s also relevant to note the fact that he participated in the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies. “I’m very suspicious of it.”
The analysis is reportedly inappropriate
Prof Kevin McConway called the analysis inappropriate according to the latest reports.
He said the work “should not be used in arguments about how much greater the infection risk is at a 1-meter minimum distance as opposed to 2 meters”.
The study has been published in The Lancet and it’s worth noting that this is the latest to be criticized by experts who fear that amidst the pandemic some research papers that are written these days are reviewed and published too fast without having the appropriate quality checks.
We recommend that you check out the study in order to learn more details.