19/ community guidelines, all support WHO, CDC guidance, stop arguing in press, work together to tackle critical interdisciplinary problems? I believe (perhaps naively) that would be a little closer if we all agree to about “aerosol transmission” & stop saying “it is airborne”
-
Show this thread
-
20/ Thoughts? Comments? Reasons that I missed or didn’t articulate well? Suggestions for way forward? Thanks a lot if you made it to here!
48 replies 3 retweets 74 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @jljcolorado
I find it confusing to try and separate the two because aerosols are airborne. Based on my experience the public really appreciates a clear simple description so they can understand why they are asked to wear masks, avoid crowded rooms, etc. This virus is traveling in the air.
10 replies 64 retweets 229 likes -
Replying to @kprather88 @jljcolorado
I’ve actually had good success describing it as short range aeorosols (and what airborne isn’t) - Dr.
@angie_rasmussen explained it well on SciFri. I honestly have found people panic more with “airborne” bc the historical context. Appreciate the thread@jljcolorado!4 replies 9 retweets 39 likes -
Same here. "Airborne" is vague and people associate it with long-range measles-esque transmission. I've found it is more useful to educate people about more specific terminology and put it in the context of the virus in question. People get short-range aerosols when explained.
6 replies 6 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @SaskiaPopescu and
I struggled with this a lot and here's the problem I see. Language works descriptively, and not prescriptively. I like and use short-range aerosols whenever I can, but the public will use airborne hence I've decided that it's better that we do as well, but defining it correctly.
2 replies 0 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @angie_rasmussen and
So if I had magic-wand to fix terminology, I'd use short-range aerosols and nothing else. But there is no way to stuff airborne back into a bag so imho we should work on its incorrect connotations and fill that space with correct information (misinformation thrives on voids).
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @angie_rasmussen and
But the health impact whether it is short or long range aerosols doesn't matter, does it? The smaller ones (which travel further and build up in a room) will still get to the same place in your lungs, right? Can you explain how the designation of short or long range matters?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @kprather88 @angie_rasmussen and
Did you see Outbreak? There's a scene Dustin Hoffman looks at the ceiling vent and says "it's airborne!" to mean that it's gonna spread all over the hospital; that everyone in the same building is at equal risk. We see a Steadicam shot through vents. That's what people may think.
3 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @kprather88 and
Whereas the consensus of the aerosol-scientists is that, yes, close-range is most risk and while the epidemiology does show spread beyond six feet in what I'm calling the 3Vs—venue (indoors), ventilation (poor), vocalization (a lot)—lines up, it's also not spreading like that.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
That said, I think the only way forward is to provide authoritative and science-based guidance that's also honest about the uncertainty but calm: There is a bunch of stuff we don't yet know, but a strong case for adding ventilation to the mitigation stack in particular ways.
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.