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.
-
Show 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 -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Linsey Marr
And here’s another leading scientist on airborne transmission.https://twitter.com/linseymarr/status/1385751394595090436 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Linsey MarrVerified account @linseymarrReplying to @zeynep @jljcoloradoThis is a silly headline, as the model ASSUMES instantaneously and continuously well-mixed conditions, like if you blow a smoke ring, the moment it exits your mouth it immediate spreads evenly throughout the room. Under such conditions, of course distance doesn't matter!5 replies 33 retweets 247 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Joseph Allen
Leading aerosol/ventilation scientist after another has tried to get CNBC to correct the dangerously misleading headline and framing. Still no go. Distance of course matters, but isn’t 100% protective in a poorly-ventilated space over time. Shouldn’t be this hard.https://twitter.com/j_g_allen/status/1385892995233468417 …
zeynep tufekci added,
5 replies 80 retweets 334 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Linsey Marr
See these this three tweets for more on the problem with the headline/framing that
@kprather88@linseymarr@jljcolorado@j_g_allen tried to explain among many others (out and about lost track of the many who tried).https://twitter.com/linseymarr/status/1385752349738688518 …zeynep tufekci added,
Linsey MarrVerified account @linseymarrReplying to @CNBCPlease fix this headline, as the model they used ASSUMES that the room is instantaneously and continuously well-mixed, like if you blow a smoke ring, it immediately spreads evenly throughout the room in zero seconds. The headline is a tautology.@zeynep /16 replies 13 retweets 127 likesShow this thread -
Enough already. This headline is dangerously misleading. Distance does a lot of work, even indoors, but if the location is enclosed then, OVER TIME, the air will mix to farther away places (though viruses also lose infectivity over time).
@Marianne_Guenot https://twitter.com/wesyang/status/1387069955343097856 …pic.twitter.com/oToyKAIgEF
5 replies 44 retweets 182 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted sam
Thread
has many aerosol scientists. Our paper below explains why distance matters for airborne transmission. TBH, this is the cost of global health agencies not stepping up to provide correct transmission explanations. Misinformation thrives in a vacuum.https://twitter.com/samuelmehr/status/1386837096313368582?s=20 …zeynep tufekci added,
sam @samuelmehruntil now I had only read the "COVID is airborne" coverage and not the actual paper (in@TheLancet by@DFisman@zeynep et al) it is beautifully written and *utterly* convincing, a model of scientific prose https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00869-2/fulltext … here's the whole piece: pic.twitter.com/VfxloWAwG4Show this thread3 replies 20 retweets 130 likesShow this thread -
Oh my goodness, STOP! That study—a model—did not find that distance offers "no protection". The model *assumed* the air was continuously and completely mixed in an enclosed space! That's not how real life works. Indoors, air does mix *over time* but also virus loses infectivity.pic.twitter.com/cbsnPGKuZo
9 replies 67 retweets 326 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zeynep
The reporting has run off into la-la land. I talked with
@bellwak@washingtonpost, who might run a clean-up article, but the real story isn't nearly as exciting/alarming.5 replies 2 retweets 47 likes
Just reading the study or taking five minutes with any of the scientists working on this for a long time could have cleared it all up. Or the slightest familiarity with the epi record! Or a bit of common sense! Who'd rather be right next to the person than 60 feet away?
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @linseymarr and
“Imagine a virus” Ok. “You are now equipped to navigate the covid-19 crisis.”
Everything I’ve read about coronavirus in the last twelve months was just common sense borne out.0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. 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.