And we are 100% (or nearly so) in agreement re. broadly deployed mitigations.
-
-
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 -
Replying to @marer_stephen @Merz and
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.
1 reply 6 retweets 80 likes -
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 -
Replying to @zeynep @macroliter and
No point to keep going at it on a thread. *Many* papers, lots of progress & acknowledgement—more to be done. Anyway, people who worked on this from the earliest days made all these points. They deserve, at a minimum, civility. The apology, too, will come, but that’s for history.
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @marer_stephen and
Who do you want the apology from? The WHO? I find this so bizarre. This entire thread isn’t an argument with anyone who is saying “No! You’re wrong, it’s all droplet spread!” The sanctimoniousness is fascinating.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
I said the people who deserve apologies should get, at a minimum, civility, from people who were wrong about most basic stuff until like yesterday. The rest is for history.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @marer_stephen and
History? Apologies? Weird. I’d hope you’d care more about saving lives today.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @macroliter @zeynep and
if you cared about saving lives today, you’d be asking WHO to change their infection control guidance that calls for the use of contact/droplet precautions unless an AGP is being performed. it’s killing HCWs and patients (nosocomial outbreaks)
1 reply 8 retweets 49 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.