Given the unusually high number of swimmers catching Covid in the Olympics, many have hypothesized as to why. I’ve seen a few people point to some work we published on how environmental factors affect SARS-CoV-2’s aerostability.
When respiratory aerosol is exhaled, the dissolved CO2 in the fluid (in the form of HCO3) leaves the aerosol over the course of a couple of minutes. When the CO2 leaves, the pH of the aerosol reaches >10.3.
The high pH drives viral decay.
We have reported that anything that can limit this increase in aerosol pH, such as nitric acid or CO2, slows the airborne viral decay rate. This, in turn, will increase the risk of transmission.
The net effect is more impactful over longer time periods. Elevating the CO2 from 500 to 3000 ppm leads to a 10-fold increase in the airborne viral load over 40 minutes. Likewise, increasing nitric acid from 0 to ~50 ppb leads to 2-fold increase.
The decay rate of the virus in the aerosol slows over time (left). The reason for this is that the trace acidic vapor in the air (normal air pollution) will slowly neutralize the aerosol. As this happens, the aerosol becomes more and more hospitable for the virus (right).
Okay, so what does this have to do with a swimming pool? Well, the swimming pools are disinfected with chlorine. Chlorine vapourwill react with the water in the respiratory aerosol to form acid. This will reduce the aerosol pH.
This suggests that the chlorine in the air around the pool will lead to the virus remaining infectious in the air longer, leading to higher transmission risk.
Theory 1: The chlorine above the pool neutralizes the aerosol, leading to the virus remaining infectious in the air longer.
Theory 2: The concentration of chlorine above the pool is so high that the pH in the aerosol actually becomesacidic, and the acidity inactivates the virus.
Which theory is correct? 1 or 2?
Unfortunately, currently, we simply don’t know. The measurements have yet to be made. I could speculate, but that wouldn’t be all that helpful (if not harmful).
A link to the study where we first explore the interplay between air acidity and aerostabilityis here:
It’s also important to note that there are numerous factors that ALL play a role in airborne viral transmission. What is happening in the Olympic pool could be due a factor other than aerostability, or even a combination of multiple factors. We need to make measurements to know.
Since there were people discussing this, I thought it would be helpful for people to have a better understanding of the underlying processes that are in play.
If you have any questions, I would be happy to try to answer them.
I suppose? Humidity is known to affect mucosal immunity, perhaps this is something similar(?).
Maybe someone more familiar with this end of things can add some insights… 🙏
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
How poor experimental design coupled with media sensationalism undermines physical and engineering solutions to limit the spread of airborne diseases
A 🧵
Airborne disease transmission is a complex, and multidisciplinary process. As a result, understanding how various factors affects transmission rates is exceedingly difficult.
Consequently, designing effective physical mitigation strategies for this process remains a challenge.
Various strategies have been implemented with various degrees of success. Masking, ventilation, filtration, using CO2 monitors, etc.
The challenge is, how does one test how well do they limit transmission?
CO2 monitors have become popular tools people can use to estimate their indoor air quality.
A new study was recently published that explores how we can use them to optimise occupancy thresholds and identify problem locations.
Actual practical science!!!
🧵
Here’s a link to the study. The lead author is Henry Oswin; he did his PhD with us, working with me on Covid. He’s now doing a postdoc with Lidia Morawska.
Both Lidia and Henry are excellent writers, so this is a particularly engaging and easy read.
Given the ease in which CO2 can be measured, its source, and its association with both disease transmission and ventilation, CO2 has become an excellent metric by which to gauge indoor air quality.
800 ppm has been suggested as a point in which the air is deemed well ventilated.
Recently, I posted a link to an article discussing how well masks work at limiting airborne disease transmission. Gillian read the link and asked the following question.
This gets to a critical issue I thought I’d discuss.
Alright, so the specific quote being highlighted is below. Now, this may seem alarming to many people.
To be clear, the author is saying that they estimate the number of infectious aerosol an infected person exhalesis extremely low.
In this thread I’m going to discuss the multiple issues around initial exhaled viral load.
I’ll go into how it’s measured, what its value means in terms of mitigation, and I’ll discuss how propagandists use this information to mislead people.
I was at a restaurant in my hometown (Shaughnessy's Cove in Summerland, BC) and noticed the outdoor air conditioning system.
Whether they know it or not, they are using aerosol science to cool the air. I figured I’d put together a thread to explain how these work.
So, what is actually happening?
By spraying a mist, the outdoor eating area is cooled. Now, the area isn’t cooled because water is being sprayed all over the surfaces, akin to spraying a hose of water everywhere. Something more interesting is happening.
Mist is sprayed from a hose. Now, mist is simply a large population of individual aerosol droplets. The composition of each droplet is pure (or at least nearly pure) water. The size distribution of the aerosol will range from 50 to <1 microns.
This article is a byproduct of a previous thread I wrote about the dangers of asbestos. In it, I explain what to your body after you inhale it. In short, it doesn’t go anywhere, and causes harm for years.
In the article, I discuss the history of asbestos use, how long it took for people to understand how much harm it was causing. I also dicuss how industry spent decades covering those findings up. We are still, to this day, dealing with the consequences of their actions.
Since there is talk about bringing back ASBESTOS (this is somehow true), I thought it would be useful to describe just some what happens to you when you breath this stuff into your lungs.
In short, it’s terrible.
A 🧵
What is asbestos?
Asbestos is a group of naturally occurring fibrous minerals. There are 6 types: Chrysotile, Amosite, Crocidolite, Tremolite, Actinolite and Anthophyllite.
They have some useful properties (including heat resistance, strength, durability and well insulating)
Because of these physical properties, humans have been using asbestos for thousands of years for a variety of purposes. In the 20th century, it began to be used as a building material.
In the 1970s, the health risks associated with asbestos exposure began to be recognized.