“Before this pandemic it was completely socially acceptable to come to the office coughing, sneezing, spreading viruses around,” says Dr Morawska. “No one would say anything—even people educated to understand how infections are transmitted.”
1/6
economist.com/science-and-te…
1/6
economist.com/science-and-te…
"That insouciance must be corrected. The @WHO must acknowledge the need to control airborne pathogens and governments must agree and enforce comprehensive standards for indoor air quality that keeps people healthy."
2/6
2/6
"One way to ensure compliance might be to issue ventilation certificates for buildings, similar to the food-hygiene certificates which already exist for restaurants. Occupants should also be given information about air quality routinely, through the use of monitors and..."
3/6
3/6
"...sensors that can display a room’s carbon-dioxide levels or other relevant measures.
For new buildings this should not cost much extra, though replacing exiting ventilation systems might be costly. But not as costly as covid-19 has been."
4/6
For new buildings this should not cost much extra, though replacing exiting ventilation systems might be costly. But not as costly as covid-19 has been."
4/6
"And if improvements in indoor air quality also reduced absenteeism and improved productivity, those gains might cover that cost."
5/6
5/6
"Although detailed economic analyses remain to be done,” wrote Dr Morawska in a recent edition of Science, “the existing evidence suggests that controlling airborne infections can cost society less than it would to bear them."
6/6
6/6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
