1/ Incredibly disappointed in this @CDC document aimed at "layered mitigation". But I probably shouldn't be surprised by now. cdc.gov/coronavirus/20…
2/ It addresses near-field (close contact) inhalation dose w/ masks and distancing. That's good. Far, far, far more on fomites and surface cleaning than far-field inhalation dose (shared indoor air). Ventilation is given lip service w/ little guidance. Incredibly disappointing.
3/ The lack of understanding of ventilation or its importance (or perhaps just disregard) is wholly obvious. Incredibly disappointing.
4/ Unless I missed it, zilch on engineering controls such as improved centralized filtration (just in case you can't do that ventilation thing). Incredibly disappointing.
5/ Zilch on use of single-zone portable HEPA air filters to supplement ventilation, boost equivalent ACH, or help reduce concentrations of aerosol particles when students are out of room, which lowers levels on return & can signif' lower daily dose. Incredibly disappointing.
6/ You'd think that a year into this horrific pandemic @CDC would acknowledge that inhalation dose of virus-laden aerosol particles occurs in both the near and far fields. Incredibly disappointing.
7/ Masks help to reduce both near- and far-field dose, and distancing reduces near field further. But we have an arsenal of proven technologies to help reduce the far-field dose further. Why not provide guidance to schools? Incredibly disappointing.
8/ It is likely that the near field aerosol concentration is somewhere between 2(ish) to 5 to 10x the far field depending on a number of factors that I have tweeted about previously (quality of masks, distance, body orientation, dispersion).
9/ Given this, remember that treating "shared air" in the far field can also lower near field exposure and inhalation dose to a measurable degree.
10/ CDC is effectively advocating for going 1/2 to 2/3rd of the way on layered dose (or risk) reduction, then let school districts figure out how to do the rest on their own. A COVID-19 scavenger hunt for schools. Incredibly disappointing.
11/ Are we back to March 2020 w/ the added focus on masks and at least a passing mention of ventilation? School districts are poised to get a lot of funding to make their schools safer. @CDC's incomplete advice increases risks of wasting those funds. Incredibly disappointing.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Dr. Richard Corsi

Dr. Richard Corsi 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 @CorsIAQ

13 Feb
1/ Ventilation of Schools. My experience working with public school districts for more than two decades is that classrooms are, in general, woefully underventilated (and that's before COVID-19 times!). Others have found the same.
2/ Some results from a 4-yr study involving 7 high schools of different ages & construction, & 46 classrooms (focus on occupied day - plot at right). Approx 80% of classrooms = permanent. Red bar shows approx ASHRAE 62.1-2019 ventilation rate (small variations around bar).
2/ For permanent classrooms, median ventilation rates are less than 50% of ASHRAE 62.1-2019, w/ mean values approx 40% lower. Schools all had mechanical systems and capability of much greater ventilation. When asked why, our team was told (firmly) - energy savings ($$).
Read 20 tweets
6 Feb
1/ Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR). The CADR of a portable filtration system is:

CADR = f x Q.

f is the fractional removal efficiency of particles that pass through a device (value = 0 to 1). Q is the volumetric flow rate of air through the device (e.g., m3/hr, ft3/min). ...
2/ A portable air cleaner may be highly efficient (high value of f) but also highly ineffective at removing particles from air if Q is very small. This is the case for a wide range of ion generators. Don't be fooled by claims of high efficiency. It's f x Q that matters.
3/ On the other hand, a portable filtration system might have a lower efficiency (say, 0.5) but a very high air flow rate that leads to significant reduction of particle concentrations in air. It is f x Q that matters.
Read 19 tweets
5 Feb
B117 is spreading in US but we have not seen the explosion yet. Brace yourselves. These outcomes in Italy & Israel should give pause, a motivation for tripling down on reducing inhalation dose in all activities, and a quintupling down on layered dose reduction in schools. more..
Dose and risk reduction in schools must include re-opening plans based on extent of community spread, rapid exit plans, rapid testing if possible, rigorous and universal mask requirements, distancing and lower occupant density, pod groups, increased ventilation ....
supplemented with single zone filtration, e.g., portable HEPA air cleaner, to achieve at least 6 effective air changes per hour, as much outdoor activity (including teaching) as possible (I used to teach lectures on occasion outdoors in Texas - it can be done when elements allow)
Read 6 tweets
3 Feb
1/ SCHOOLS. A few days ago I watched the Director of the National Economic Council say we need children back in school so parents can get back to work. While that is one benefit, it should not be construed as the sole or even primary reason for wanting children back in school.
2/ The school environment is important for the mental, social, and in some cases physical growth of children. Remote learning has also led to an extraordinarily high virtual drop-out rate in many cities.
3/ But whether for schools that are already open or those that will be re-opened, we ought to invest in infrastructure that makes them substantially safer during this pandemic and healthier beyond the pandemic. It is not rocket science. Just do it!
Read 21 tweets
31 Jan
1/ It takes a lot to move higher education, but COVID-19 is doing it. Many in higher ed are looking at a much different future, certainly much more on-line education (that's been happening and will accelerate).
2/ Expect more in-person (face-to-face) lectures w/ simultaneous live-streaming and recording to provide students w/ options, less demand for on-campus housing and transportation services at many universities, universities providing greater IT support off campus, and more.
3/ There is potential for greater service to under-served communities and advancement in diversity, equity and inclusion with these changes. But there is also a risk of doing it wrong and a loss of sense of academic community and support.
Read 9 tweets
27 Jan
1/ I am seeing many interpreting this as "it's safe to send kids back to school." That's a misinterpretation. First, safe implies certainty, which is not true here. What can be said is that it is much safer to re-open schools if specific risk reduction measures are taken.
2/ Densely-populated, poorly-ventilated (the majority of schools I have studied in Texas) schools, especially during any periods when masks are not worn are a recipe for infection. Ask Israel.
3/ Proper layered risk reduction works, is not rocket science, and does not have to break the bank. More on LRRS in my webinar here:
Read 6 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

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

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!