Kimberly Prather, Ph.D. Profile picture
Mar 12, 2020 4 tweets 1 min read Read on X
The two things that would help the most right now--1) testing so people who have been around many others, traveling, or have slight symptoms will know if they should stay away, and 2) social distancing. Right now, we don't have #1 so we have to rely on #2. (1/4)
We are flying completely blind in decision making regarding public health. It is extremely important we error on the side of caution and go with #2 because that is all we have right now. (2/4)
There is large uncertainty in where we are heading but we know we are in the exponential growth phase with no idea how many poeple are walking around with COVID-19 as most have zero symptoms. We ultimately control how bad this becomes by our own actions. (3/4)
The question to ask is: do we want to look like Italy or Japan? Now is the time to be extra cautious. (4/4)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kimberly Prather, Ph.D.

Kimberly Prather, Ph.D. Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kprather88

Sep 11
In my 32 years, I have never been asked to share unpublished raw data before we publish it. We were concerned about the dangerously high levels of hydrogen sulfide, so we chose to share our validated preliminary results so SD county health could exercise the precautionary (1/)
principle and immediately protect ALL people being exposed. All public health officials are supposed to do whatever it takes by any means necessary to protect public health once they are aware of potential high risk. The public has been sounding the alarm for years. (2/)
@SDCountyHHSA has known about these odor complaints for years and continued to ignore the residents. Our data just validate what the public has been saying. Now @SupNoraVargas recent excuse is us not sharing the "raw data". First, no one has asked. Second, we will share it (3/)
Read 5 tweets
Sep 11
This is the "hot spot" we have identified in Imperial Beach where turbulence in the river releases extensive odor and river spray aerosols containing viruses, bacteria, and other pollutants. The foam extends from this point all the way to the ocean. Residents told me (1/2)


Image
Image
Image
Image
the area the "river" (better name is raw sewage discharge) runs thru "looks like a war zone". People who have lived here all their lives feel neglected. As they tell their stories they have tears in their eyes. Not one that I have met has not told horrific health stories (2/) Image
related to breathing this toxic soup. Within an hour of being here, I typically get a headache even when the smell is not present. I invite @SupNoraVargas or anyone from @SDCountyHHSA who feel this air is "safe to breathe" and "you can't get sick by breathing it" to come (3/)
Read 12 tweets
Sep 10
Today, @SupNoraVargas held an emergency press conference claiming the air in South Bay SD is safe. Yesterday, I presented our findings at a presser showing continuous, multi-day measurements of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) well above the CARB ambient hourly standard of 30 ppb (1/8)
—indicating unsafe air quality. Vargas’s claim directly contradicts not only our calibrated, validated hydrogen sulfide (H2S) data but also the numerous health complaints from South Bay residents, including migraines, respiratory issues, and (2/8)
GI problems. It’s deeply concerning that a public official trusted by the community to protect their health would make such a misleading statement based on an unverified set of measurements from an unknown location and device with no critical details (where? how long? (3/8)
Read 9 tweets
Apr 24
Getting ready to fly again. PSA: I will wear a mask the entire time in the airport & during boarding (highest risk times). Once we are at high altitude, I will assess the sounds of those around me. ACH are high so the key is to make sure those close to you are not sick. (1/3)
If I feel "safe", I will remove my mask to eat/drink but I will keep it on the rest of the trip. So far, this has worked as I have not gotten COVID-19 yet even with travel. It is all a calculated risk and each person needs to decide knowing people are traveling while sick. (2/3)
I have to say that this approach has worked for me so far. As for meals in DC, I will eat outside as much as I can but only have so much control over some of the "events". I will be carrying my CO2 monitor the entire time so if levels get high, I will leave. (3/3)
Read 6 tweets
Apr 20
I'm just re-read @WHO's recent report. As motivation, they state up front: ".....during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the terms ‘airborne’, ‘airborne transmission’ and ‘aerosol transmission’ were used in different ways by stakeholders in different" (1/4)
"scientific disciplines, which may have contributed to misleading information and confusion about how pathogens are transmitted in human populations."
My question which has not been addressed: (2/4)
Why did it take @WHO and ~100 experts 33 pages to conclude that SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens are airborne (replaced by they "travel through the air")? This could have been clarified & stated in 1 page max. More words lead to more confusion, not less. (3/4)?
Read 10 tweets
Apr 18
Oh @WHO-adding more confusion, not less. Why remove "aerosols" which means those particles that remain suspended in air (vs droplets that drop quickly) and can become inhaled?? My head hurts after reading this convoluted mess. (1/2)
Question for @who and those who remained to help on this report (I stepped away after seeing the unhelpful path it was going)--do you really believe "infectious respiratory particle" clarifies the main pathway to infection for COVID-19 and other respiratory particles??? (2/2).
Honestly? This feels like a massive cover-up for why @WHO did not state SARS-CoV-2 was airborne right up front which would have protected millions of people. They knew SARS-1 was airborne--why did they not apply the precautionary principle to SARS-2? (3/)
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(