The amount of unknown and disagreement after all this time and money spent is a big failure of science. Laymen have a unique peak into how science works day to day, which might be good or bad depending on how you see it.
Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
91–100 of 292 posts
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#92After this pandemic, doctors and scientists are going to have to come up with more media-friendly terms from now on. The problem is that "airborne droplets" and "airborne" sound too similar and it's very hard for regular people to understand what that means. "Airborne droplets" means that viruses need saliva to transmit between people. "Airborne" means that the virus only needs dust particles to transmit to other peo…
I propose calling airborne droplets “germ infested mouth farts”. It’d definitely get the 4 year olds on board.
That's pretty disgusting and vulgar. Let's not.
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this is the fundamental failure of this administration. Months ago we could have designed a high quality and visually unique mask with less than N95 efficiency but with a reasonable safety and comfort level. We should already have been manufacturing and distributing them at cost. They should be mandatory in all enclosed spaces and we could have prevented a lot of the spike in spread we are seeing now and are li…
There is no reason to design a worse mask than N95. They could have just manufactured more N95 masks and rationed them to prevent hoarding and speculating. Every household could get an N95 mask ration card to buy masks and decon tools like UV-C lights and sparky ozone generators.
It's very difficult to wear an N95; it's really constrictive and uncomformtable. You can't expect civilians to wear N95 masks all the time and you need to weigh the comfort of a mask against its effectiveness.
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why wasn't there a large spike with the recent protests in the participating demographic? https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/07/01/research-d... The chants "no justice, no peace"? "I can't breath"? Those were clear chants. Everyone breathing on each other while chanting. Unencumbered by a mask.
That's only a single paper, hardly conclusive. But also: > Unencumbered by a mask. The picture at the beginning of the article you linked shows every protester wearing a mask.
[deleted]
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#95If anyone is in an indoor environment and wants to gauge risk, a portable co2 meter can be had for about $100-$150. Cod2 is a good proxy for indoor pollutants/air exchange, and I’m assuming it is a good proxy for aerosols too. I use one of these, you can use a portable battery to power it. https://www.amazon.com/AutoPilot-APCEMDL-Desktop-Data-Storag...
It seems to be an even better proxy for aerosol risk compared to general circulation because co2 is coming from lungs - I might make myself a wearable logger
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely all industrial / professional HVAC get installed with HRV and the loss here is going from the "100% efficient" recirc to HRV, no?
Not all if it isn't designed that way (ours isn't because we never plan to not use recirc). The loss isn't actually that much and since we are using low temp cooling water to cool the air and we have a significant amount of that on site already we barely notice (still a cost though).
How old is your building? New construction is so weather sealed and lacks fresh air leaks to meet air quality standards. Pretty sure whatever standard to get a green rating on a building requires outside air to be mixed in and due to efficiency requirements there has to be heat exchanger.
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unencumbered by a mask. That hasn’t been my experience. Every action I’ve attended has had clear messaging leading up to it about masks and social distancing, and attendees have adhered to guidelines.
This is adhering to the social distancing guidelines? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/george-floyd-protest... The crowds are tight and packed.
That was my experience in June. Crowds were packed but nearly everyone had a mask. It makes me think the masks are more important than social distancing (at least outdoors), but I'm not gonna stop social distancing where feasible. I was very pleasantly surprised that people didn't get sick.
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unencumbered by a mask. That hasn’t been my experience. Every action I’ve attended has had clear messaging leading up to it about masks and social distancing, and attendees have adhered to guidelines.
This is adhering to the social distancing guidelines? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/george-floyd-protest... The crowds are tight and packed.
You started with masks, not social distancing, so sticking to your original argument, I'd say that link you provided just indicates that masks worked well enough to protect the protestors, even without considering the social distancing aspect.
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#99If anyone is in an indoor environment and wants to gauge risk, a portable co2 meter can be had for about $100-$150. Cod2 is a good proxy for indoor pollutants/air exchange, and I’m assuming it is a good proxy for aerosols too. I use one of these, you can use a portable battery to power it. https://www.amazon.com/AutoPilot-APCEMDL-Desktop-Data-Storag...
We're constantly filling the rooms we occupy with aerosols from our mouths. How will this help?
Re: Why aren’t we talking more about airborne transmission?
#100This is a good article. I work at a biotech company that studies virus transmission and helps others study it. It was clear from the very beginning that transmission was airborne. Why would it not be? That the WHO and some doctors were assuming it was not seriously damages their credibility as healthcare professionals. Current events should lead people to seriously question deference given to doctors. They need to be…
I have several (medical) doctors in my family. They were pretty clear from the beginning that what the WHO was saying was BS. They pretty much agreed with what you're relating; I don't think it's doctors in general who are ignorant of how a virus gets transmitted. I completely agree with your first point; but what we need to seriously question is the cherry-picking of sources that were paraded in front of us by the m…
YouTube took it upon themselves to ban any videos that contradicted the WHO statements.