This time claiming "air purifiers don't reduce exposure to viruses in classrooms"
BOLLOCKS
1st clue this was going to be a junk study: they did an RCT
Wrong tool
There is no equipoise, no unknown or barely discernible benefit to weigh against likely harm
2nd - Many studies already show cause & effect & mathematically quantify the relationship between exposure levels / reduction levels of pathogens in air and infections
The fact these particles can directly enter the bloodstream and wreak havoc throughout the body adds a whole new dimension to the issue of air pollution
Risk mitigation of shared room ventilation and filtration on SARS-CoV-2 transmission: a multicenter test-negative study | Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology | Cambridge Core - bit.ly/3Vf0RyX
โฌ๏ธ ventilation = โฌ๏ธ Covid HAIs
Increasing from 1 to 6 ACH = 50% reduction
(~40% to 20% attack rate)
Increasing from 6 to 10 ACH = more reduction
(~20% to 10% attack rate)
"For each additional ACH, we measured an estimated 12% lower odds of infection, while presence of any RMV carried approximately 50% lower odds."
Canadian Standards Association (CSA) has called for universal respirator use in healthcare settings & when performing patient care outside of healthcare settings (eg โ in the home) in the latest edition of CSA Z94.4, Selection, use and care of filtering respirators.
How you can help:
The draft CSA Z94.4 Standard is now out for Public Review until August 19, 2025.
Please weigh in with your positive, constructive comments at .
The draft Standard embodies the Precautionary Principle.
In the absence of risk analysis, N95s are required because healthcare spaces & activities involve daily HCW exposure to Risk Group 2 (RG 2) pathogens like Influenza and RG3 pathogens like SARS-CoV-2, often unknown.