I CAN see the sense of Solomon Steinbett’s arguments (Letters, June 2) about the weak science behind two-metre distancing and the wearing of face masks. But I think those advocating easing of the advice are missing two important aspects.

Typical human behaviour comes into it. I have (unscientifically) watched small groups of people stopping in the street to talk. They start at two metres but as the conversation gets more animated they unconsciously move closer. The same will happen at one metre.

READ MORE: One-metre social distancing would be much more achievable

And what about the precautionary principle? The evidence is weak but it’s not negligible. If the familiar two-metre rule and the advice on face masks probably do make some difference, surely it’s irresponsible to assume that reducing these simple practices will not cause some extra unnecessary deaths.

Derek Ball