8/ Guangzhou restaurant, buses, other cases. “Contorsionist thinking” (B. Nazaroff) required to explain w/o aerosols - Note that when face-to-face, majority of infection likely through aerosols, much more concentrated right in front of person:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360132320302183 …
-
-
So multiple issues. The lack of consistent terminology plus not enough current research on different size particles in different ventilation circumstances indoors. It's not measles, obviously, but it's also infecting people not within classic droplet reach. Appreciate this convo!
-
That puts it well, as to where it is on the range, pending a lot more VERY carefully controlled observation and research.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We do certainly need to focus on air flow, as well as behavior, but that's why "airborne" and "aerosol" need updating. The downwind effect suggests that it probably wasn't small particle aerosols, but this gets right to the heart of the terminology issues...
-
...what's the difference between a < 5 um aerosol vs a slightly larger airborne droplet? Not having good terminology muddies the water and makes it hard to communicate effectively with each other and with the public.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Probably because the concentrations downwind were higher given the wind speed/direction and the air recirculation flow pattern. Please check Yuguo Li’s pre-print for an in-depth analysis: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20067728v1.full.pdf+html …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.