Once we finally solve this terminology, they're gonna have another problem, which is that all these viruses are "airborne" and we just see longer-range transmission amongst the more contagious/in odd situations.
So they're gonna have a chance to make up more words soon anyway.
Two posts up, add that the virus might last longer without degrading in air. Could be either. Lasts longer in env or takes less to infect. Either way we'd see more spread.
Here's Chapin calling droplets airborne, just over short range.
So who the heck knows what this special "airborne" word even means.
But I'm just using the regular English word remember, so I don't mind.
Please avoid indoors, distance, mask, ventilate. Little particles float essentially forever in unventilated spaces. (That's physics, so there's no debating that.)
For more reading, 1. measles airborne after 2 doctors' offices outbreaks where hung in air, and a stadium outbreak where sucked into a vent up to the 2d floor:
It's just an old talking point that keeps getting repeated. It comes from the PROCEDURE bringing MANY HCW into the room for intubation. Plus the idea of drops flying out of mouths when you intubate.
Here is part of the problem. From a textbook published in 2015, the chapter on RSV. This is just an example.
Says aerosol not likely, citing author's own paper from 1981 (35 years ago).
Says fomite important (touching objects...). Cites nothing.
This similar kind of citation for fundamental principles feeds into papers.
Pic from a paper from 2019. Cites a text book chapter from 2003 and two more papers from same author as earlier, from ~1981. All for the prospect that RSV transmits by touch, only.
The 2003 text book is 5. The other two are 6 and 7.
5 cites to another 1980 paper. Probably one of the 6 and 7 papers.