Before this gets out of hand. "Distance doesn't matter" IS NOT what "it's airborne" or primarily aerosol-transmitted means or implies, and the headline is not reflecting correctly a modeling paper they are using says. Calling in @linseymarr and @jljcolorado among others.https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1385628971086323719 …
-
Show this thread
-
What's true is that in a "well-mixed" room (VERY IMPORTANT ASSUMPTION IN THE MODEL IN THAT PAPER BEING REPORTED ON), if you spend long enough time, distance isn't *completely* protective which IS NOT AT ALL THE same as "distance doesn't matter" or that 6 and 60 feet are the same.
11 replies 184 retweets 1,003 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Prof. Jose-Luis Jimenez
Perhaps the most important misunderstanding has been assuming aerosols=long distance only. No, they do not teleport from a person to over two feet away a la "beam it over there, Scotty." Aerosols ALSO concentrate around the person and dilute with distance.https://twitter.com/jljcolorado/status/1385708443537866758 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Prof. Jose-Luis JimenezVerified account @jljcoloradoAgree with@zeynep. Distance is about the most importance measure for an airborne pathogen (see diagram below from@linseymarr). The authors say it is less so with masks. But masks in the real world are mixed quality and poor fit, so air goes everywhere. Best to keep distance https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1385707216280375298 … pic.twitter.com/M2RkWPuO4a11 replies 155 retweets 645 likesShow this thread -
I'd suggest that it doesn't help to jump from "distance isn't fully protective especially if you sit long enough in an enclosed space where the air keeps mixing" to headlines like "6 feet and 60 feet are the same!". Again
@linseymarr and others have great work on this.9 replies 55 retweets 496 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Kimberly Prather, Ph.D.
Another from an expert.Of course aerosol concentration dilutes with distance (and very quickly outdoors for obvious reasons!) but if the space is enclosed, they can keep accumulating, and "6 feet" isn't some magic bubble—especially if you stay long enough.https://twitter.com/kprather88/status/1384162849354776579 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Kimberly Prather, Ph.D.Verified account @kprather88Replying to @tdonaghey @WHO @CDCgovIn general, the concentration falls off as a function of distance. However, this can get complicated by the fact that aerosols don't fall to the ground but instead can build up over time in poorly ventilated indoor spaces.6 replies 83 retweets 421 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Dr. Alex Huffman (he/him)
Adding. It goes without saying that I'm just a vehicle here, reflecting years of research on this topic by many scientists. I'd like that headline corrected, at a minimum, though, @RichMendezCNBC. Telling people distance doesn't matter at all isn't okay.https://twitter.com/HuffmanLabDU/status/1385722709271711745 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Dr. Alex Huffman (he/him) @HuffmanLabDUReplying to @BedrockConcept @macroliter @StanfordThe point is that the authors numerically modeled the physical process of aerosol spread & they applied the assumption that air in a room is well-mixed. So the headline the editors picked really plays on their base assumption more than the actual results. https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1385707216280375298 …9 replies 36 retweets 336 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zeynep
I’m sorry you don’t agree with the study’s conclusions, but if you read the full article you will see that the headline and article are accurate. That is what they told us.
9 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Dawn_Kopecki
Maybe you should talk to some people who've been publishing in this very field for years? Even if they told you that, it is a dangerous, misleading headline to put there that you should check with others (not me!). This is not some empty science field.
1 reply 0 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @Dawn_Kopecki
It's not okay to put such a big claim in the headline with nobody else consulted even if, as you say, two MIT professors who have not published in this field before (with all due respect to their model) told you that's what their study means: that distance doesn't matter at all.
2 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
I think you need to read the entire story, not just the headline, to see what the authors of the study said themselves about their conclusions.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
That headline is misleading and dangerous, and there are an increasing number of scientists who've published in this very field telling you this in this thread and elsewhere. I read the article, it does NOT REFLECT the well-mixed assumption which is crucial.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
"The distancing isn't helping you that much and it's also giving you a false sense of security because you're as safe at 6 feet as you are at 60 feet if you're indoors. Everyone in that space is at roughly the same risk, actually," Bazant said.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Dawn_Kopecki
You can't just run with that, without checking with other scientists in the field on whether that's a justified conclusion and headline, with all due respect to the math model with a well-mixed room assumption from two people who have never before published on the topic.
1 reply 1 retweet 17 likes - 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.