Covid19 can transmit via air. It's airborne.

[intrepidity]

Trump may think that he's giving all of us the finger by not masking, but we may just get the last laugh.

Same goes for all the Magat covidiots out there.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/26/key-stopping-covid-19-addressing-airborne-transmission/?outputType=amp

[FBaggins]

1. That hasn't been established

This is an opinion piece.

No idea how it would give us the last laugh

[SunSeeker]

2. OFFS. It's a piece by a Harvard scientist who wrote a paper documenting airborne transmission.

Joseph Allen is director of the Healthy Buildings program at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and co-author of “Healthy Buildings: How Indoor Spaces Drive Performance and Productivity.”

As stated in the WaPo article:

"...evidence has continuously pointed to airborne transmission of covid-19, as my colleague Linsey Marr and I outline in a recent paper. Scientists have detected the virus in places that can be reached only by air, such as ductwork; asymptomatic transmission is occurring, meaning people are spreading this without coughing or sneezing large droplets; and basic aerosol physics shows that people shed an entire continuum of particles when they cough, sneeze or talk, including large particles that settle out quickly and smaller ones that stay afloat for hours."

And as far as last laughs, it would be karmic justice for Trump, who won't wear a mask, to get the virus he inflicted on us with his malignant incompetence.

[FBaggins]

4. Let's not ignore the appeal to authority fallacy

No need to puff him up. It's still an opinion piece. Yes... an opinion by a "Harvard scientist"... but also one who focuses on "healthy buildings" who would get quite a few more calls for interviews, sell many more copies of his book, and likely have a tidy business in health building consulting if the virus were thought to be airborne. Maslow's hammer definitely applies here.

Research is ongoing, but the current scientific consensus (including WHO and CDC) is that it isn't airborne. He mentions the March 10th choir practice event as evidence... yet the CDC just published a study on the event that concluded nothing of the sort:

The 2.5-hour singing practice provided several opportunities for droplet and fomite transmission, including members sitting close to one another, sharing snacks, and stacking chairs at the end of the practice.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm

And the WHO says "In an analysis of 75,465 COVID-19 cases in China, airborne transmission was not reported"

COVID-19 is transmitted via droplets and fomites during close unprotected contact between
an infector and infectee. Airborne spread has not been reported for COVID-19 and it is not
believed to be a major driver of transmission based on available evidence

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf

And, of course, no other coronavirus has been shown to be airborne.

Scientists have detected the virus in places that can be reached only by air, such as ductwork;

I think this is a misstatement similar to those who conclude that antibodies don't provide immunity because some people have tested positive twice. What has been detected is RNA fragments from the virus. Not necessarily the virus itself. One of the studies he's refering to said " None of the air samples was infectious in cell culture" and WHO said "is not indicative of viable virus that could be transmissible"

[Native]

3. Two things: 1) Biogen 2) Studies show it lingers in the air for up to 3 hours

[FBaggins]

5. Not "studies show"... one study hints

That same study admitted that the conditions in the lab were highly artificial and that at best they showed that the risks of airborne transmission were "non zero".

1) Biogen

The existence of super-spreading events in a pandemic is not evidence of modes of transmission.

[Native]

6. Here ya go...

SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols throughout the duration of our experiment (3 hours),

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973

Aerosolized coronavirus can remain in the air for up to three hours.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/coronavirus-resource-center#:~:text=Aerosolized%20coronavirus%20can%20remain%20in,up%20to%20three%20hours.

"Taken together, our results indicate that aerosol and fomite transmission of HCoV-19 [SARS-CoV-2] are plausible, as the virus can remain viable in aerosols for multiple hours and on surfaces up to days," the authors conclude.

This was the finding of an experiment conducted by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in Hamilton, Montana. https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=229248#

There's more if you look.

[FBaggins]

7. Those all refer to the same study

A study that did not establish airborne transmission of the virus. They merely concluded that their highly artificial experiment hinted that it was "plausible".

It's also important to note that purpose of the study was to evaluate the surface and aerosol stability of SARS-CoV-2 in comparison to SARS-CoV-1. Their conclusion was that the decline in infectiousness of the first was similar to that of the second... with SARS-CoV-2 moderately less infectious than SARS-CoV-1. That's important to the OP... because SARS-CoV-1 (like other coronaviruses) is not thought to be airborne.

[Generic Other]

8. You always are a vocal DU skeptic on anything disaster related

Fukushima, BP oil spill, etc. Can I ask your professional expertise out of curiosity? I am inclined to weigh in on the side of believing a "Harvard" scientist's opinion, but you always challenge these types of voices.

I think it is important you also back up your claims with some information concerning your own credentials. (Also, I am not meaning to criticize or weigh in one way or the other. Just a lay person wanting to stay safe and be informed).

[uponit7771]

10. The data driven contrarians are needed in communities like DU

[Generic Other]

12. I am not disagreeing with you

but if you challenge the "expert" opinions or scientific studies in every disaster, you should also back up your claims with your own scientific background. This is just basic argument and persuasion. Nothing more.

[Native]

14. Many contrarians fail to take into consideration the novel aspect of this virus.

You're not going to find double blind, peer reviewed studies within a month or two of something new attacking us.

I'm sick to death of people disounting every sensible precaution that is recommended by experts simply because there's been no double-blind, peer-reviewed study on it yet.

[Native]

11. There were other experiments...

Joshua Santarpia, an associate professor of pathology and microbiology at the University of Nebraska Medical Center.

Also, Professor Ke Lan, director of the State Key Laboratory of Virology at Wuhan University.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-coronavirus-spreads-through-the-air-what-we-know-so-far1/

[FreeState]

17. Did you read the linked paper in the OP?

1. Detection and survival of coronavirus in air
SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in air has been detected in several studies in hospitals, including at distances greater than 2 m from patients and in outdoor air in crowded areas near a hospital and a department store.i ii iii One study found that the majority of these viruses were associated with aerosols (i.e., microscopic droplets) of diameter 2.5 microns and smaller, which can remain suspended in air for 2 hours or more.i Another detected SARS-CoV-2 in aerosols in the size range of 1-4 microns.iii Furthermore, viral RNA has been detected on the surfaces of an air exhaust outlet and fan, places where direct transfer from an infected person could not occur.iv While these studies assayed viral RNA, the finding that SARS-CoV-2 in fine aerosols (<5 microns) has a half-life of 1 hour in terms of infectivity raises the possibility that some airborne virus is infectious.v If we assume that SARS-CoV-2 survives in large droplets, there is no reason to think that the virus would not also survive in aerosols. Previous studies have shown that other viruses survive equally well, if not better, in suspended aerosols compared to large, stationary droplets.vi vii viii

2. Asymptomatic Infectivity
There are reports of asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2.ix By definition, asymptomatic patients are not coughing or sneezing, which means they are not frequently generating large droplets. Therefore, for these asymptomatic patients, other modes of transmission, namely fomite and airborne, must be occurring. Studies on patients with confirmed influenza infection, show that infectious virus in fine particles can be released by regular breathing and talking, without coughing.x This is of concern because a new preprint shows high shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in the throat pre-symptoms.xi

3. Aerosol physics
While the traditional distinction between “droplet” and “airborne” transmission of infectious disease has been useful for setting guidelines on the use of personal protective equipment, it has also established a false dichotomy in understanding the behavior of viruses in the air. Virus- containing droplets that are released by breathing, talking, and coughing span a continuum of sizes, from 0.01 to hundreds of microns. It is impossible for someone to release “large droplets” (>5 microns) without also releasing smaller ones.xii Thus, transmission that is purported to occur via the spray of large droplets from a cough could in fact be occurring through inhalation of much smaller droplets at close range. In fact, a physics-based simulation suggests that the majority of exposure at close range occurs by inhalation of small droplets rather than by contact with large droplets that land on the mouth, nose, and eyes, unless the people are closer than 30 cm or the droplets are very large.xiii

----

i Liu Y, Ning Z, Chen Y, Guo M, Liu Y, Gali NK, Sun L, Duan Y, Cai J, Westerdahl D, Liu X, 2020. Aerodynamic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in two Wuhan hospitals. Nature, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-
2271-2273.
ii Santarpia JL, Rivera DN, Herrera V, Morwitzer MJ, Creager H, Santarpia GW, Crown KK, Brett-Major D, Schnaubelt E, Broadhurst MJ, Lawler JV, 2020. Transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 in viral shedding observed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. medRxiv, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.23.20039446v2.
iii Chia PY, Coleman KK, Tan YK, Ong SWX, Gum M, Lau SK, Sutjipto S, Lee PH, Young BE, Milton DK, Gray GC, 2020. Detection of air and surface contamination by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in hospital rooms of infected patients. medRxiv, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.29.20046557v2.
iv Ong SW, Tan YK, Chia PY, Lee TH, Ng OT, Wong MS, Marimuthu K, 2020. Air, surface, environmental, and personal protective equipment contamination by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from a symptomatic patient. JAMA, 323(16):1610-1612.
v van Doremalen N, Bushmaker T, Morris DH, Holbrook MG, Gamble A, Williamson BN, Tamin A, Harcourt JL, Thornburg NJ, Gerber SI, Lloyd-Smith, JO, 2020. Aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 as compared with SARS-CoV-1. New England Journal of Medicine, 382:1564-1567.
vi Kormuth KA, Lin K, Prussin II AJ, Vejerano EP, Tiwari AJ, Cox SS, Myerburg MM, Lakdawala SS, Marr LC, 2018. Influenza virus infectivity is retained in aerosols and droplets independent of relative humidity. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 218(5) 39-747.
vii Kormuth KA, Lin K, Qian Z, Myerburg MM, Marr LC, Lakdawala SS, 2019. Environmental persistence of influenza viruses is dependent upon virus type and host origin. mSphere, 4:e00552-19.
viii Lin K, Marr LC, 2020. Humidity-dependent decay of viruses, but not bacteria, in aerosols and droplets follows disinfection kinetics. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(2):1024-1032.
ix Li C, Ji F, Wang L, Wang L, Hao J, Dai M, et al. Asymptomatic and human-to-human transmission of SARS- CoV-2 in a 2-family cluster, Xuzhou, China. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Jul [cited April 11, 2020]. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2607.200718
x Yan J, Grantham M, Pantelic J, de Mesquita PJ, Albert B, Liu F, Ehrman S, Milton DK, EMIT Consortium, 2018. Infectious virus in exhaled breath of symptomatic seasonal influenza cases from a college community. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(5):1081-1086.

[KewlKat]

9. Thanks

[ProfessorGAC]

13. Need To See Broad Based Data

Microscopic droplets of sputum & mucous can be airborne for many minutes.
This is a form of airborne transmission but not direct airborne viability.
Does the virus transmit by breathing in viruses in air? Yes.
Can transmission occur by not encapsulated viruses floating in air? See my post title.

[iemitsu]

15. Nothing about Covid 19 is established as it is a brand new disease.

Cornavirus is clearly spreading and it is spreading through the air (look at Snohomish County Choir Practice).
We will know a lot about this later but now all we can do is error on the side of caution.

[Baclava]

16. "Fresh air and open windows..." cool, so walking beaches is the place to be, mega UV light too!

[Native]

18. Bingo