Restrictions on Freedom due to the Premise of “Health Protection”. A Few Remarks Inspired by the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in the Republic of Poland

There is no question that “health protection” is the premise for the establishment of constitutional restrictions on rights and freedoms. It has been so far the subject of legal science only exceptionally and occasionally; mainly in the context of restrictions on the freedom of economic activity. It was only the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the Republic of Poland that brought a wider interest in this category, referring it also to the limitations of another fundamental freedom – freedom of expression. Considering the above, the analysis of legal limitations on the freedom of expression, imposed on the basis of the premise of health protection, seems to be by all means justified and purposeful.

Installing outdoor gyms (OGs) has become popular in many countries worldwide. To date, data about the perceptions and behaviours of its users are still being determined. Therefore, this study aimed to determine who and how uses the facilities and how their users perceive them. The sample comprised 1,036 exercisers aged 44.1±16.1 years. For over 85% of users, OGs are the facilities where they follow their planned exercise programme, with 56.2% declaring exercising solely there. The main perceived advantages of OGs are free-toaccess (42.6%) and outdoor location (40.4%), while disadvantages are dependence on the season (57.2%) and the technical condition of devices (24.9%). The predominant motive for using OGs is to maintain and improve their health (38.6%) and stay fit (27.9%). OGs are an essential alternative to indoor gyms in situations of limited availability under pandemic conditions. For many people, they are even the only place to exercise.