"open air treatment played a great part in preventing infections, even under unfavorable climatic conditions"
"recommended masks, cubicles..."
"cellphane tents", said to prevent transmission of even measles and chickenpox
1938
Again, not even looking. Was copying PDFs for someone and opened this one randomly to see what was in it.
From 1938 Watt, "Ventilation of Hospitals"
"In regard to the infectious diseases, spread mostly by spray infection, the degree of ventilation in sanatoria so dilutes the infection that it is rare for an epidemic to gain more than a very small footing"
1941 Airborne Theory - Aerobiology
from the introduction, this field concerns itself with:
"the ocean of air that envelops us carries and mingles the myriads of forms of small organisms that inhabit the earth"
How'd we ever lose this vision?
Last part of intro:
Mildred Wells involved in this publication, as well as her husband, William Firth Wells. I've posted about both before.
Probably worth sampling the authors/contributors:
Everybody has.
Well, except physics-challenged people who think viruses "fall to the ground".
"air currents outside of walls, as well as within walls, may be important in carrying certain pathogens considerable distances"
Hey, Australian quarantine experience, say hi!
Skagit Choir, say hi!
Amoy Gardens where SARS-CoV-1 transmitted from one apt tower to another, say hi!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@ExtroSpecteur I presume he is saying airborne mitigations should be equally alongside touch or droplet.
No, there is no evidence for any. As I keep saying, but happy to say again, for thousands of years people flipflopped between "it's touch" and "it floats but generates in swamps because ...
@ExtroSpecteur ... they did not understand pathogens. Once they did, referring to respiratory illness, they simply assumed it was droplet because most infections can be traced to an infected having been near the index case. Droplet became an idea with Chapin in 1910, to explain why one needed..
@ExtroSpecteur ...to be close. However, first, their idea of droplet was not necessarily 2 metres. Their idea of airborne was many kilometers, so their discussion of close has to be understood in this context. Two, their investigations were crude, by the 30s air people like Wells
It's always funny to me that virologists get everything and transmission so wrong. I guess because they work with viruses they think they know everything about them. 🤷
The sad part is we would assume that because they work with viruses they know everything about them.
*everything about
Virologists don't really work on transmission. Maybe sometimes they spin a tub and flip some in the air or something. But they don't really know what's going on. And then the doctors know the biological clinical side of things but they don't work on transmission either.
Just remember the ladder of denial and elite panic myth means if you are hearing a 2 it's a 4. If a 4 it's a 6. If a 6 pack your bags. You'll never hear 8 and up the TV will just play static