The WHO just updated its page on how COVID-19 transmits. Those few sentences on aerosols represent one of the most crucial scientific advances of the pandemic. My NYT piece on the century-long history of the error, the year of delay—and what it means now. https://t.co/B9y2Mf6LC7

This history goes back to scientists trying to get germ theory accepted and fighting (incorrect) folk theories of miasma—infection via stinky air—and they made some mistakes themselves along the way. Some froze into dogma. It took until this pandemic to, finally, start fixing it.
It's a huge advance, not a minor change. It explains so much of what went wrong and how to do better. We started with an incorrect theory of how COVID-19 transmits. One key error goes back a century. And it took a pandemic year to get to even this point. https://t.co/B9y2Mf6LC7
It's a long piece—and honestly, maybe I have maybe 10% of just the narrative in there, and maybe 2% of the history—let alone the fascinating science. I'm co-author on this peer-reviewed piece in The Lancet that explains some scientific details/issues. https://t.co/xPnnWfo75E
It is *really* important for the WHO, the CDC and all the public health agencies to publicize this and lead because there are also a lot of misconceptions—some stemming from the same errors. Masks and distance are still important, for example, but need more context to evaluate.
And... Wow. The New York Times is reporting that the CDC has just updated its descriptions of how COVID-19 is transmitted via aerosols. (Reading the CDC new version now). Eppure galleggia. https://t.co/8Xx0fHe8Oo
Incredible week. First the WHO, now the CDC. It'll take work to have all this be heard, and correctly. Just today, I saw Canada is planning to close beaches "to protect against variants." It takes more than a few website updates to fix a year of messaging. https://t.co/HYSCgWOf71
To get the significance of this, *just last week*, key UK infection control societies published a review with the same conflations/errors that CDC and WHO just moved towards correcting—and rated fomite and aerosol transmission (outside of medical procedures) as equally possible.
I want to add this here. Also, the story is really fascinating and much longer in terms of the sociology of science, standards of evidence, the scientific details and more, but we cut it to "only" about 5,000 words because that's already so long. 😁 https://t.co/KbVVhILmi1
I have a growing databases detailing rules and restrictions around the world—to this day—that made sense from where we started—short-range respiratory droplets—but do not make sense at all, and are even counterproductive. Need to change that AND also emphasize what remains same.
Aerosol scientists kept telling me that plexiglass barriers might be making things *worse* by blocking ventilation. Just out in Science. Desk shields associated with *increased* illness risk in schools. Closing playground? Also uptick. So many upshots. https://t.co/lcyt647Xkm
On that: the epidemiological record is clear. And the science explains why. Note that as I wrote, it’s not completely safe if you engaging close and prolonged contact among unvaccinated people. But it’s absolutely SO much safer. We need a very different approach to the outdoors https://t.co/stMtyfLJVd
Yes! Some of what we can try to do now, and for likely other respiratory diseases going forward, is not necessarily expensive, and some that is expensive is a better return for us than excessive hygiene theater and plexiglass and all the rest. And good for health in general! https://t.co/Man8hBO0MT

More from All

You May Also Like