Thread by @EvonneTCurran

Great. Can we start with the pandemic.
The mental models for transmission have been done by world experts in aerosols (not IPC).

Here is of @trishgreenhalgh 's evidence on the virus being airborne.

Here is one by Marr & Tang
Their comment on the <5 >5 IPC paradigm is it defies physics.
Its from 2021 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34415335/

A simple one illustrating a critical error (also 2021)

Recognising its airborne has always been No 1 - unfortunately not for @WHO nor IPC

What cleaning air does / does not do - excellent mental model.

The one illustrates close space transmission. The use of the term 'close contact' is a misnomer - its a SPACE wherein transmission happens yet the actual mode of transmission is unknown - and crucially may not involve contact - close contact does not evidence droplets (@WHO)

And another one... explaining transmission

Here is one I did to illustrate what factors people were using to assess mask use (blue circle) and all the factors outside the circle that should have been considered.

Also my latest suggestion to omit using 1 word descriptors (airborne or droplet ) but to use a source - to - infection pathway model for evidenced transmission routes

[NB When you use this model contact is not the No 1 way to get an HAI]

So its the absence of mental models that is the problem. Its the @WHO and all IPC organisations who have failed to state its airborne when the evidence for droplets does not exist.

Its @WHO videos and tweets (still up) telling people its not airborne - sans evidence.

And another mental model illustrating how IPC has not stepped up to its responsibilities...
The @WHO and CDC, Dept of Health and noted guidance all have different places where droplets land - ridiculous.

This brilliant work is also from 2015,
IPC have no excuses - those who reviewed evidenced and determined 'its droplets' got it wrong.

Mental models will not solve this until IPC esp @WHO and UK stand up and say we were wrong.
@JOHNJOHNSTONED pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25816216/

Also, the @WHO must stop producing guidance until it ceases to mis-reference. An example from a 2022 doc.
2 references in support of HH being 'most effective' don't mention hand hygiene.

IPC must correct their physics defying statements
Mental models - yes - if evidenced