See his friends outside, Plan B during confinement.
-
LOUISE MERESSE / SIPA
The new restrictions that came into effect on Saturday allow you to leave your home for as long as you want, between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m., within the limit of 10 km around your home.
The government takes into account the fact that we contaminate ourselves more inside than outside.
But this permission should not make us forget that the risk of contamination also exists in the open air, even to a minimal extent.
Michèle Legas, teacher at the School of Advanced Studies in Public Health, reminds
20 Minutes of
some precautions to be taken even in the open air.
"Everything you can do outside, you have to do it outside," government spokesman Gabriel Attal said Friday at RTL's microphone.
For this new turn of the screw in 16 departments, from Saturday, the executive put in effect the authorization of exits to keep the French, tired by a year of anti-Covid-19 restrictions.
Unlike the first two lockdowns, this time we can stay outside as long as we want, respecting the curfew from 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. The government relies on the fact that we are more contaminated inside than outside.
But the Prime Minister has set limits to this possibility.
"Making outdoor activities easier should not be the pretext for barbecues with friends, for gatherings in public spaces or in parks and gardens, or even for gatherings in front of certain bars which serve food or drink for sale. take out, ”said Jean Castex on Thursday.
20 Minutes
interviewed Michèle Legeas, teacher at the School of Advanced Studies in Public Health, specialist in the analysis and management of health risk situations, to understand what are the benefits and risks of this strategy.
Is it a good idea to encourage us to leave our homes in this health context?
Indoors, in spaces with little or no ventilation, the transmission of Covid-19 is facilitated.
All the international studies carried out to date show this.
Conversely, outdoors, we are less likely to be contaminated.
In addition, it is important that we continue to ventilate, exercise, for our mental and physical health, especially after a year of restrictions.
But it should be done with caution, because the risk of contamination outside exists, even if it is minimal.
I also hope that this incentive to see our loved ones outside will not be interpreted by the population as a total absence of risk or a lesser danger of the virus, because it is still circulating.
How can we further minimize the risks outdoors?
It is not because we are outside that the virus droplets cannot be projected by one individual on another, especially if we are side by side, and that we laugh, or speak loudly, or cough… So we must not relax our vigilance.
If we walk outside with members of our household, this is not a problem since we hang out with them at home.
But if we find friends, people with whom we do not live, then we must be careful to respect the distances, one meter fifty or two.
You also have to be careful about the mix of groups, their size, and activity.
A game of pétanque, respecting the distances between players, is risk-free.
But a barbecue or an aperitif outside is more risky if people are talking to each other, and without the mask if they are eating or drinking.
Likewise, it is undesirable for people to congregate in small parks, where they will be forced to pass each other within a meter, for a certain period of time.
Jean Castex declared that the prefects will be able "to prohibit the frequentation of certain public spaces or even the demonstrations and gatherings" in the event of health risk.
Is this justified in view of the risks that you describe?
I would prefer that he put on the pedagogy, the explanation.
Opting for coercion is to risk encouraging people to flee controls, in a “not seen, not taken” mode.
Society
Coronavirus: Do massive outdoor gatherings lead to the creation of clusters?
Society
Coronavirus in Marseille: "Give us a party", 6,500 people parade for the Plaine carnival
Health
Confinement
Coronavirus
Covid 19