So Twitter help aside, people needed simple, actionable guidelines and proper intuition about transmission. In my view, some concerns here about the word aerosol/airborne/analogies may apply to healthcare settings but were not a problem with public discussion.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @samhorwich and
I think it critical to stress that the issue of onward transmission and areosolization is extraordinarily complex w/in epi dynamics and there is no robust consensus, particularly w/ C19. Likewise, we have little data on public response to risk comms in C19. Caution is warranted.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DrJaimeAnne @samhorwich and
I don't think there's much disagreement that aerosol transmission occurs, and it is critical especially in superspreading events which are widely documented to be key drivers of the epidemic. The exact proportion will likely be never known but guidance failure is obviously there.
2 replies 2 retweets 20 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @samhorwich and
I would respectfully disagree
@zeynep that the evidence on the routes/mechanisms of transmission and pathogensis are well-characterized or resolved. I would make the same argument for the scientific uncertainty surrounding risk response to communication about it as well.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DrJaimeAnne @samhorwich and
Is there dispute that there is some level of transmission longer than one meters, especially in poorly- ventilated indoors? Even CDC and WHO say this now, I hardly see a lot of controversy over this anymore to be honest. What proportion etc. are good questions but unclear.
2 replies 3 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @samhorwich and
@zeynep What is most clear from an evidenced perspective is that there are likely multiple routes of transmission (common in resp. viruses). Again, impact of those routes on epi dynamics and pathogenesis is *unclear* and all caution is therefore warranted around those findings.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DrJaimeAnne @samhorwich and
Caution warranted how? There are multiple routes (no dispute) and these include instances beyond one meter (have seen no dispute). Caution in making statement on exact proportion of transmission? Sure. But that's not public's concern. They need guidance. Practically means what?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @samhorwich and
@zeynep I’d say there’s no consensus on the < one meter argument, and again, magnitude of that route is an unknown. I’d exercise caution on making broad generalizations of certainty on what the public is seeing, processing, and changing based on these discussions, though.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DrJaimeAnne @samhorwich and
So we disagree. I don't really encounter many experts who claim one meter is enough indoors, and even the CDC and WHO have moved beyond that finally, and I think we have clear evidence on what the public is seeing and doing, and we have the guidelines right in front of us.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @samhorwich and
@zeynep I think you’ve far overstated my position in your recap. My points aren’t to do with the veracity of recommendations, they’re to do with the amount of assuredness we get comfortable with in a highly evolving evidence landscape.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
For example? What would you avoid?
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @samhorwich and
1) assuming exactly what public risk response and info processing looks like right now 2) comms w/ certainty around rts of transmission—>epi dynamics—>disease severity 3) wildly vacillating btwn eviscerating govt. public health and begging for trust in govt. regulated vax.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DrJaimeAnne @samhorwich and
Okay. I'm going to disagree on 1 and 3. I think we have a lot of evidence. On 3, I believe taking them to task is the best way to improve trust, because whatever we don't push to fix will get weaponized by people whose goal is merely to create mistrust, not fix things.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
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.