Do you spend the same amount of time inside and outside? Do you spend it with the same number of people? Do you sit or stand in the same orientations for the same lengths of time? If yes, is that true for everyone else?
-
-
Replying to @Merz @jljcolorado and
Prof. *Dr.* Nausheen R. Shah Retweeted Prof. Jose-Luis Jimenez
Drifting off-topic. We're talking physics here. What is the difference between outside and inside?https://twitter.com/jljcolorado/status/1473467587984044038?t=1JgwrcS45VDqwR0ng0NlWQ&s=19 …
Prof. *Dr.* Nausheen R. Shah added,
Prof. Jose-Luis JimenezVerified account @jljcoloradoReplying to @PrasadKasibhat1 @Merz and 10 othersAnd here you see a very careful study, from Yuguo Li who sits in@WHO committees. When talking, the short-range airborne (aerosols) is dominant over large droplets at all usual conversational distances. Higher distance would favor aerosols even more https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132320302183 … pic.twitter.com/Oaptah15AM1 reply 0 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @nausheenrshah @jljcolorado and
The observation is that outdoor xmission is about 20x lower than indoor. Dr. Jimenez argues that transmission indoors and out would be equally efficient in and out for droplet xmission. But time, frequency, geometry will all influence droplet xmission. Not only distance.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Merz @jljcolorado and
The *original* point was about the dominance of aerosols. Physics settles that question. I don't care what you call them, as long as people understand what you mean. Relevant: what you need to mitigate. Hence stress on N95 mask, air purification/ventilation etc.
2 replies 2 retweets 49 likes -
Replying to @nausheenrshah @jljcolorado and
Those arguments are a lot stronger. I agree.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Merz @nausheenrshah and
And we are 100% (or nearly so) in agreement re. broadly deployed mitigations.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Merz @jljcolorado and
Ok. But again with the qualifier!! What do you not agree with?
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @nausheenrshah @jljcolorado and
I think we might disagree about the importance of droplet mitigations *in addition* to aerosol mitigations (some of which overlap) in congregate and clinical settings. I don't think the half-assed droplet mitigations in, e.g., supermarkets, can make any difference at all.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Merz @nausheenrshah and
But we clearly are in lockstep on aerosols. Prior to omicron I'd say that aerosol transmission might have been a major but *perhaps* not dominant mode of transmission. With omicron I'm satisfied that the vast majority of transmission must be airborne.
11 replies 2 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @Merz @nausheenrshah and
so you get to say you were right before about it not being airborne, now using the transmissibility of O to save face and all of a sudden NOW it’s airborne. Just admit you were wrong the first time. Lots of people were wrong. Like you!
5 replies 1 retweet 36 likes
I don’t mind the walk-back, the scientists who were making these points from the earliest should, at a minimum, get people to be polite to them and appreciate how much crap they endured—actually owed an apology. Being wrong *and* condescending into almost 2022. That isn’t okay.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @marer_stephen and
Alex isn’t a good foil for you or a “walk back.” He hasn’t been arguing against airborne. The misconception I object to is one widely held among public & even some “experts” : that SARS2 infectivity doesn’t decay with distance & time from a point source. It’s a virus. Not magic.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @macroliter @marer_stephen and
Once again, debate has been the *predominant*/major mode, not incidental airborne, only AGP-airborne, only rarely-airborne. It matters because it corresponds to different mitigations. Anyway, honestly the points about infectivity, decay, half-life… Tons of papers. All covered.
4 replies 1 retweet 23 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.