Stronger prevention against the aerosol component of COVID spread is absolutely crucial for public health, especially healthcare. Major pushback against this has cost many lives. Please listen (2 min) to the best reasons why this WHO leader says they are not worth it. 1/
2/ In relation to the comments by Dr. Conly about N95 risks to pregnant women - this is a nice thread by @caruzycki showing major errors in how that study was designed. Authors modified an N95 mask until it was very to breathe through first.
3/ In contrast, there are lots of legitimate & very important reasons to use upgraded masks (N95s, elastomeric respirators) - because they protect lives.
4/ Read this article w/ nice investigative reporting by @By_CJewett and others. They cover the >3,500 American health care workers who have died - and show their faces and names. Many died b/c they had little access to proper PPE. theguardian.com/us-news/ng-int…
5/ If you're interested, I highly recommend watching the full 60 min presentation from yesterday by all three scientists on the topic of airborne transmission of COVID. The ~15 min presentation by @kprather88 & @DFisman is really excellent. ucalgary.yuja.com/V/Video?v=3323…
6/ All leaders at the #WHO or anywhere who oppose aerosol prevention measures like N95 masks should have to look into the eyes of the families of HCWs who have died & say - but the masks might have caused acne, exzema, or maybe some other unfounded risk.
7/ I’m not trying to be sensationalistic or to take advantage of a sound bite misstep in a conversation. The point is that these comments come from someone w/ tremendous authority in these matters & who will have had many of these conversations. Veracity of response is crucial.
8/ Aerosol protection (i.e. #N95s, elastomeric) are effective and safe against airborne virus spread.
There is simply no credible or broad scale scientific reason they shouldn’t be used widely against COVID.
Supply chains have caught up, so availability is not the issue ...
9/ Making N95s just ‘available’ to HCWs is not enough, esp. given all the previous confusion about their use. The onus should never be on HCWs to do extra research.
Hospital, state, & (inter)national leaders need to mandate aerosol protection AND explain why it is so critical.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A really nice story from Kim Tingley about the Skagit Valley chorale outbreak from last year.
Walks through the personal side of the tragedy, how the outbreak provided crucial clues about the airborne spread of COVID. [+ choir song link] HT @jljcolorado nytimes.com/interactive/20…
2/ “'We proved how you get this thing,' Comstock told me. 'And it’s so damn frustrating to watch the news and see that they’re ignoring it.'”
3/ "But the notion that [sitting close, sharing snacks, stacking chairs] caused so many infections, as @jljcolorado characterized it to me, is 'absurd.' He says that that emphasis helped enable the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. to maintain and defend their guidelines."
Here summarizing the new & significant evidence over the last year that SARS-CoV-2 is airborne - in relation to evidence WHO suggested should be necessary.
1/ Helpful clarification by #CDC w/ important practical implications to avoid wasting energy & money on excessive surface cleaning:
"each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection"
2/ Important to note that COVID can potentially spread in individual cases via direct/surface contact, via cannonball-like droplets, or inhalation of aerosols.
The brief clarifies that surfaces are statistically very unlikely to cause many infections; so focus most on the air.
3/ From CDC brief today:
"However, based on available epidemiological data and studies of environmental transmission factors, surface transmission is not the main route by which SARS-CoV-2 spreads, and the risk is considered to be low."
3/ The review ends by showing a parameterized size distribution of respiratory particles & the risks in different parts of a room using #masks, #ventilation, and #filtration. Broad application to SARS-CoV-2 other respiratory viruses.
Frequently questions about type of room air filtration & if #ionization is a useful upgrade.
Nearly always, simple filtration is sufficient for most people. Study here shows a bipolar ionizer also *not* useful at reducing PM2.5. Thx @JimRosenthal4. (1/x) sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
2/ "[experiments] ... suggest that operation of the ionizer unit led to a small increase in loss rates for ultrafine particles (<0.15 μm) and a small decrease in loss rates for larger particles (>0.3 μm), but with negligible net changes in estimated PM2.5 loss rates."
3/ In contrast to relative ineffectiveness of ionization technology to reduce concentration of suspended particles in a room, simple #HEPA filtration does an *excellent* job. See e.g. examples in this 🧵 showing filtration in a school classroom.
1/ More good support that indoor dining is challenging (no masks indoors = risky). Nice article by @RoniNYTimes, w/ comments from knowledgeable folk following a recent CDC #MMWR report.
2/ “You have decreases in cases and deaths when you wear masks, and you have increases in cases and deaths when you have in-person restaurant dining,” said #CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky
3/ Unfortunately, the Nat'l Restaurant Assoc called the #CDC report “an ill-informed attack on the industry hardest-hit by the pandemic.”
I feel for restaurant owners & workers. I honestly can't imagine the difficulty through the pandemic. But the challenge & risk is legitimate.