It's long been hard to deny that there is aerosol transmission—the evidence has been overwhelming. I'm told that there are still authorities around the world denying this outside of so-called aerosol-generating procedures but let's take that as the baseline. But there's more.
-
-
I want to add something. Recognizing SARS-CoV-2 as *predominantly* airborne isn’t an obstacle. It helps identify effective mitigations& chokepoints—like Japan did, for example. Airborne doesn’t mean it necessarily spreads like measles—a common error. TB is airborne but lower R0.
Show this thread -
“Predominantly airborne” doesn’t mean masks and distancing are useless. In fact, aerosol scientists were among the first to emphasize both. But correct theory of transmission gives both better explanations of the epidemiological record and better mitigations over a broader range.
Show this thread -
Why this really matters. This isn’t quibbles at the margins. Its an incorrect paradigm being replaced. Some things overlap between the two, but not everything does and thus there will likely be many real changes going forward that affect *other* respiratory pathogens as well.https://twitter.com/Don_Milton/status/1382891848356741125 …
Show this thread -
Another great paper, making the case for the predominance of airborne transmission and, crucially, focusing on practical recommendations for buildings with a realistic & nuanced discussion of the trade-offs. Three papers in key medical journals in a week! https://twitter.com/j_g_allen/status/1383073549380882438 …pic.twitter.com/cX8TGGrb07
Show this thread -
Our
@TheLancet paper is a work of synthesis in the service of a causal framework that best explains observed phenomenon over a year of intense data collection. I'd be interested to read a case for "it's predominantly and/or largely droplets" fits the data. https://twitter.com/dylanhmorris/status/1382827972239843330 …This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
I don't mean the above as lip service. I don't see how the totality of evidence works well for an explanation that differs fundamentally, but I'd be super interested in reading that framework: not as an assumption in textbooks but as how it fits the full range observational data.
Show this thread -
I want to add two things that I see confused/claimed. First, see this thread and the paper itself where we explicitly discuss whether the predominance of close contact transmission implies gravity-driven droplet transmission is primary or even a lot.https://twitter.com/MackayIM/status/1383370706843410433 …
Show this thread -
This paper looks at totality of observed data and evidence from past year, and argues why aerosol-transmission as primary route can parsimoniously explain it all, while droplets as primary route contradicts key parts of the evidence. I'd love to read the opposite case if written.
Show this thread -
Second: I keep seeing claims that if it's aerosols, that means cloth or surgical masks are useless, and also what's called "droplet precautions" are useless. The aerosol experts have written so many papers on why that's not the case, and, in any case, that's not what we observe.
Show this thread -
The paper, while word-limited, does go into both of these topics, but as with any shift like this, I agree the implications deserves more attention/explanation, and hopefully more soon, partly because part of the problem were some flawed assumptions in multiple directions.
Show this thread -
And, this doesn't bind my co-authors, but I think our evidence-base is stronger for discriminating between droplets vs. aerosols, but not as much for fomites especially through resuspension etc. No, not washing groceries but.. I'd wipe down high-touch surfaces in crowded indoors.
Show this thread -
We briefly address this (word limit!
) but it's not correct to assume that airborne transmission necessitates either a high R0 like measles or even a uniform transmission pattern. Tuberculosis is airborne but has lowish R0—but likely also overdispersion!https://twitter.com/bobby_dread/status/1383787373134184450 …
Show this thread -
Another good addition for people following this topic is Dr.
@linseymarr, a true pioneer in this field (her latest in@bmj_latest, also out this week(!), was titled "Covid-19 has redefined airborne transmission").https://twitter.com/linseymarr/status/1382842521286549508 …Show this thread -
And just putting this thread here so people can get some context of how difficult it has been, for so long, to make progress.https://twitter.com/linseymarr/status/1383066390136041477 …
Show this thread -
Feels like an inflection point. Do read what the article linked by Dr. Karan argues: that short-range (close contact) transmission of respiratory infections is also PRIMARILY aerosols—goes against decades of claims of aerosols only/mostly being long-range. https://twitter.com/AbraarKaran/status/1384240928873844742 …pic.twitter.com/xvf2bQeES8
Show this thread
End of conversation
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.
