That's because people are desperate for effective mitigation measures, and you cannot get there without explaining and centering airborne transmission. Countries with surges are *still* not distinguishing indoor/outdoor, explaining mask fit/filter etc. This isn't quibbling.https://twitter.com/DFisman/status/1385241631306260490 …
-
-
We see incorrect mitigations due to erroneous transmission assumptions so clearly around the world, and we still see this some here (CDC has moved along faster and more than the WHO). I don't understand how the implications can be denied. This will be in so many history books.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think their theory is roughly "mostly non-floating droplets, maybe some weird exceptions". It seems strongly influenced by effectiveness of droplet precautions in US hospitals to prevent infection among HCWs. But, "droplet precautions" in a well ventilated space... (you know)
-
Yes. Also aerosols don't teleport magically to post two-meter space, so "droplet precautions" will, to some degree (depending on ventilation, as you say) work since they also pass through that close contact range. Acknowledging airborne isn't "everyone always wear N95s". Aargh.
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.