Authors Jose-Luis Jimenez
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
1/ TIME FOR SOME AIRBORNE + DROPLET HISTORY
Now that @WHO and @CDCgov have finally accepted *after a year of denial and delays* that airborne transmission is a major mode for COVID-19, it is time to review the history to try to understand why this response was so poor.
2/ Remember, the evidence is overwhelming that airborne transmission (1 to 1 in close proximity, and 1 to many in shared room air = superspreading) is the dominant mode of
3/ And probably we are being charitable by saying only "dominant." Can't find any real evidence that airborne is not 99%. Airborne can explain all the epidemiological patterns, while large droplets and fomites can't, and they are pathetically lacking
4/ @zeynep published an outstanding article yesterday in the @nytimes where she explains the context, the implications, and some of the history.
I wanted to give some more historical detail, without the word limits that she faced in
5/ Why does this matter? bc we still face resistance. We have seen how @WHO and others do the changes too quietly, and they don't communicate how the mitigations need to change. And in many countries they report that mssg doesn't arrive, still focusing on disinfection + plexiglas
Now that @WHO and @CDCgov have finally accepted *after a year of denial and delays* that airborne transmission is a major mode for COVID-19, it is time to review the history to try to understand why this response was so poor.
2/ Remember, the evidence is overwhelming that airborne transmission (1 to 1 in close proximity, and 1 to many in shared room air = superspreading) is the dominant mode of
1/ TEN SCIENTIFIC REASONS IN SUPPORT OF AIRBORNE TRANSMISSION OF SARS-CoV-2
— Jose-Luis Jimenez (@jljcolorado) April 17, 2021
Peer-reviewed publication in @TheLancet
An honor to have collaborated in multidisciplinary team across medicine, infectious diseases, epidemiology, aerosol science, sociology
https://t.co/93NL6GhAPm
3/ And probably we are being charitable by saying only "dominant." Can't find any real evidence that airborne is not 99%. Airborne can explain all the epidemiological patterns, while large droplets and fomites can't, and they are pathetically lacking
Serious question: do we have any evidence to suggest that airborne is not ~100% of SARS-CoV-2 transmission?
— Jose-Luis Jimenez (@jljcolorado) May 7, 2021
Plausibly there are likely small contributions from droplets (if someone coughs on someone's face) or surfaces (rare cases).
But is there evidence? Pls include in replies
4/ @zeynep published an outstanding article yesterday in the @nytimes where she explains the context, the implications, and some of the history.
I wanted to give some more historical detail, without the word limits that she faced in
5/ Why does this matter? bc we still face resistance. We have seen how @WHO and others do the changes too quietly, and they don't communicate how the mitigations need to change. And in many countries they report that mssg doesn't arrive, still focusing on disinfection + plexiglas