The debate over "airborne transmission" of coronavirus has picked up steam. An upcoming journal article from >200 scientists urges WHO to consider incorporating risk of "airborne" spread in its recommendations. washingtonpost.com/world/europe/c…
A number of scientists have been saying this for a while now. Since early March (at least) scientists have been saying WHO (and CDC) should highlight the potential role of airborne transmission more.
wired.com/story/they-say…
Some of this boils down to a difference in definitions, as many epidemiologists think about "airborne" as a specific type of transmission where tiny droplets with virus particles can float in the air for a long time and still infect people.
It also boils down to the fact that (as WHO has emphasized) there is not enough evidence about the role of airborne transmission to say whether is it a big risk.
For these reasons, this debate is reminiscent of that around "asymptomatic" transmission.
So, airborne transmission is an ongoing grey area with (a lack of) evidence and definitions that can be interpreted in more than one way.
The consequence, unfortunately, is inconsistency in recommendations from experts, and ongoing public confusion.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.
