2/ "In a 4-page letter addressed to White House COVID response chief, @CDCgov Director @RWalensky & Acting Labor Sec. Al Stewart, 4 House committee chairs say they have "serious questions" about the adequacy of the CDC's guidance on workplace protection from aerosol transmission"
3/ "For the last two weeks, scientists, experts and unions have been prodding the administration to be more specific about guidance on exposure to small aerosol particles that carry COVID-19, which they say the CDC's official guidelines downplay."
4/ "A dozen doctors & experts detailed their concerns in a letter in mid-February to the Biden administration. "For many months it has been clear that transmission through inhalation of small aerosol particles is an important and significant mode of SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission"
5/ "Numerous studies have demonstrated that aerosols produced thru breathing, talking, & singing are concentrated close to infected person, can remain in air & viable for long periods of time & travel long distances in a room & sometimes farther"
(Last 2 par quote our letter)
6/ If you want to see our letter and press releases in English and Spanish, similar letters written independently by scientists and HCW in the UK, Canada, & Australia, see:
1/ Today the American Mask Manufacturers Association & INDA both wrote letters to the Biden Administration supporting our scientists' letter, & showing there is sufficient US supply & capacity to provide workers w/ the needed respiratory protection (respirators & ASTM face cov.)
2/ The letter should finally make clear that there is NOT a U.S. supply problem- only the failure to support production & to recommend/require the necessary respiratory protection for workers with higher risk of exposure...
3/ ... and high quality barrier face coverings that comply with the new ASTM standards for other workers and the public.
Today's Letter (and our US scientist and international letters) at:
3/ ¿Por que ha sido tan difícil controlar esta pandemia?
Porque nos han hecho defendernos y gastar muchos recursos en vías de transmisión poco importantes, y han ignorado las medidas de protección que de verdad si funcionan.
- OMS @WHO: transmisión por aire es casi imposible
- Es muy difícil de probar, y se sigue resistiendo (e.g. la OMS @WHO)
- Se prueba definitivamente con brotes en sitios donde hay poquísimos casos.
Hay quien dice que no se puede medir CO2 porque los medidores cuestan dinero
2 respuestas:
1) A medio plazo necesitamos un medidor publico en todos los sitios donde compartimos aire. Pero a corto plazo 1 por escuela, empresa etc. ayudaría mucho. ¿100 E por escuela es demasiado?
2) Se desperdicia una gran cantidad de dinero en desinfectar superficies, lo que no sirve para nada.
Y en exceso de gel hidroalcohólico, ver este ejemplo de Andalucía. Con el gel sobrante se podrían comprar 26 medidores de CO2, 11 HEPA, 2200 masc. FFP2
1/ Aranet4 has created a very simple system to display the CO2 measurement in a large screen (smart TV) in public locations. This type of public display of CO2 should be required by law **in all public locations where we share air**. During the pandemic and later too.
2/ Because high CO2 and bad ventilation facilitate the transmission of respiratory diseases such as COVID-19, but also flu, colds (other coronaviruses, rhinovirus). And also e.g. measles, which is an issue again due to lower vaccination rates.
So this should be done permanently
3/ And also for reasons of health related to indoor air quality (air toxics, radon etc.).