First, yes, HCW in Wuhan caught it at a high rate. Before they all jumped up to airborne precautions and then rate dropped.
Second, it is not the case that "most were likely community acquired" and someone should check that footnote.
R0 number falsity again (this article mid-2020 though, remember). I won't even bother to address right now. SARS2 will have R number if include asympts over 5, 6 and well into range of measles. Because of overdispersion, those that dont spread mean those that do the R0 is over 10
SARS-CoV-2 virus in air was recorded a few months later.
I have a thread on SARS in air, MERS in air, SARS-CoV-2 in air, and other viruses in air. This issue is dead.
I am not poking through all these metareviews on p E806, but check their conclusions. When they say N95 not better than surgical (IF they even say that) they often say the evidence was low quality, and it's pointing towards the N95 being better, but just isn't stat significant.
The usual "we may run out". Should not be issue now. In fairness this is mid-2020, though.
Tired of donning/doffing args. Studies showing potential reinfection by donning doffing are weak (cover mask find on fingers etc)
Probably cited b/c allow an explanation of why people getting sick while wearing surgical masks (which per droplet theory are supposed to protect)
This crap is all garbage. Go pull it yourself.
HCW may be stupid and cannot learn to use masks. Very nice.
Self-contam I talked about.
Take time to learn to use the mask? Okay, so what? This is a stupid comment.
This is an insane statement. More complex regimens yes, greater time and might make errors, but you apply the more complex because the risk is higher.
Footnote 45 tested two types ebola protective gear, found more mistakes in the enhanced - thats bc its more complicated!
You wouldn't use the basic because you make fewer mistakes! Cart before horse right here.
ANYWAY footnote 45 just noted more training reduced errors, that was the point of that article, not a selection of PPE standards!!
In the context of science as a whole this statement is just ... I mean ... what do you even say? People can choose what level is appropriate? I hope the workers get to choose, then.
... It's in the air so you gotta deal with it in the air.
AH HA (I do these as I go, so I didn't read ahead) here is
1. the crux of the matter 2. the attitude from these people
all in one quote. I need say nothing more.
This is rich.
Totally agree with this, and I'm done.
I didn't even mean to get into this stupid article.
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
Has anyone worked up the ladder of denial for bird flu?
- We have not found bird flu.
- We have found bird flu in one bird. There is no evidence of bird to bird transmission.
- We have found bird flu in many birds and there is bird to bird transmission but it has not moved to other mammals.
- We have found bird flu in a cow. However, we have not found evidence of cow to cow transmission.
- We have now found bird flu in many cows.
- We have now found evidence of cow to cow transmission but we do not know how this is happening.
- We found some bird flu in the milk. You should not worry because this might not be live virus. However, for some reason, we now think milk is the vector of transmission.