1. Rick Santelli says that "500 people in a Lowe's aren't any safer [from Covid] than 150 ppl in a restaurant that holds 600."https://twitter.com/RexChapman/status/1334894131286585358 …
-
Show this thread
-
2. A standard Lowe's store is 112,000 square feet, with what, 50-foot ceilings? A restaurant the size Santelli is talking about is maybe 9000 sq. feet., with 10-foot ceilings (being generous). So, obviously, ppl in restaurants are packed more closely together.
9 replies 5 retweets 42 likesShow this thread -
3. More important, people in a Lowe's are generally moving, not standing, and even when in line are only there for a short period of time. In a restaurant, you're literally breathing each other's air in a relatively small, enclosed space for an extended period of time.
4 replies 4 retweets 38 likesShow this thread -
4. Everyone in a Lowe's is (or at least should be) masked. In a restaurant, you're inevitably going to be maskless when you eat. People in restaurants talk much more than people in a Lowe's, which facilitates aerosol transmission.
4 replies 2 retweets 31 likesShow this thread -
5. So - and I can't believe I have to say this - 500 people in a Lowe's are so much safer from catching Covid than 150 people in a restaurant that the level of risk isn't even in the same ballpark.
3 replies 6 retweets 60 likesShow this thread -
6. Santelli's statement is roughly the same as saying a person in an SUV traveling 25 miles per hour is as likely to get hurt as someone on a motorcycle traveling 80 mph - while not wearing a helmet. It's just a stupid, false thing to say.
6 replies 6 retweets 55 likesShow this thread -
James Surowiecki Retweeted zeynep tufekci
7. Helpfully,
@zeynep just wrote about a South Korean study showing just why indoor dining is so dangerous. Rick Santelli should read it.https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1334641685154902021 …James Surowiecki added,
zeynep tufekciVerified account @zeynepA study from Korea showing why indoor dining is unsafe and why airborne transmission matters. Case B infected case A from 6.5m (~21 feet!) away in *just five minutes*, and case C from 4.8m (15 feet!). Footage shows no interaction—and only those in line of air flow got infected. pic.twitter.com/Yw3Gb8INWPShow this thread5 replies 3 retweets 32 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @JamesSurowiecki @zeynep
@WesPegden flagged some very astute concerns about the extrapolations from this study by@zeynep. I encourage you to read them before you tweet this out.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I encourage you to read my responses to him, and my longer piece onhttps://zeynep.substack.com/p/small-data-big-implications …
-
-
I read and enjoyed your back and forth with Wes - do you not think his points have validity, and that context would be helpful to share with any (re)tweets of the study? Thanks for sharing the longer piece, looking forward to reading it tonight with an open mind.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.