Do you know of any updates to this report since early July? I agree that this is powerful stuff.
Here is a paper for Sep 17 that asserts:
Direct contact and fomite transmission are presumed but are likely only an unusual mode of transmission.
In the few cases where direct contact or fomite transmission is presumed, respiratory transmission has not been completely excluded.
Thanks for taking the time to find and post this article.
Here’s one more quote from it in addition to those in your post; the concluding sentence of the relevant sub-section:
“On the basis of currently available data, we suspect that the levels of viral RNA or live virus transiently remaining on surfaces are unlikely to cause infection, especially outside of settings with known active cases.”
So, I want to say it again: If surfaces aren’t a concerning source of infection, we can stop sanitizing shopping carts, etc. And, what’s then the problem with buffets and salad bars, all else being equal?
I would like to know how this bolded bit is determined: does known active cases mean one or two per thousand, one per hundred?
Good question, although I think the implied reference was to places housing infected people (hospital wards, households, and nursing homes, etc. with quarantined infected residents). I’ll make a guess, though, that the answer to your question is “at least one person known to be infected with the virus” in one of those kinds of “settings”.
The use of the modifier “especially” in the excerpt you quoted was carefully chosen, too, I think. Kind of like saying: “You can feel pretty safe (surface-wise, at least) in a hospital; and safer still (surface-wise) at other venues, like shops, groceries, and restaurants – places where there aren’t one or more people present who are known to be infected.”.
Surfaces are clearly not a source of infection. No official or expert wants to go out on a limb and say that since much of what’s clearly true about SARS-CoV-19 transmission has not been confirmed experimentally. Disinfecting shopping carts, banning salad bars and buffets, putting up plexiglass dividers, and so on are just hygiene theater, though many people will continue to believe otherwise so long as the CDC, WHO, et al. continue to promote the myth.
It seems criminal to me is allowing restaurants with ventilation problems to serve customers indoors so long as they engage in enough theater.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30678-2/fulltext
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30561-2/fulltext
2 Likes
I was thinking the same thing when I read your earlier post. The only things I’ve read so far is that filtration by masks (cloth, paper) is affected by the type of weave and the number of layers; that clear plastic face shields are useless (except for dentists, etc.); and that bandanas are very poor.
1 Like
Restaurants are routinely evaluated for hygiene and given ratings (A,B,…), at least in CA. In terms of ventilation issues, I would think that adding ventilation and airflow pattern measurements to these inspections could fairly easily be carried out with modern measurement equipment. This would be helpful not only for covid right now, but in the long run for any transmissible disease, such as the common cold and flu.
Thanks for posting the additional links vis-à-vis surfaces. It seems that restaurants could put tablecloths, silverware, glassware, and condiments back out on un-occupied tables.
Restaurant health inspectors aren’t trained in evaluating HVAC or airflow and they don’t have the tools.
Well, no, of course not. But they could get the tools and be trained in how to use them. Or a separate team of specialists could do the airflow inspections. They need to sample and map the flow patterns and create a 3D image with color-coded data; another group could use those data to evaluate safety. Yes, it would cost money, but the trade-off has enormous ramifications. (OK, you’ll say I’m “fantasizing” again. I say I’m trying to explore creative positive thinking.)
It would cost a lot of money. Who would pay?
The City or the State, possibly with federal government subsidies.
In the whole scheme of things, including the costs of treating sickened people, job losses, testing and tracing, etc., etc. – the whole incredible economic burden, I think that routine restaurant airflow-pattern testing would be in the noise. The cost/benefit ratio would be very low, IMO.
Restaurants, along with the pallet of regional, national, and international food they offer, taken together, aren’t just the “soul” of a city or region; they’re also a big part of the “local color and fabric” that’s attractive to tourists, whose dollars – brought in from outside the city, region, or state – help fuel the local economy immeasurably. This is not to say that interstate mixing is a good thing right now. But tourism will revive, eventually, and I hope that the diversity of options in restaurants will still be alive.
Restaurants that can demonstrate with government certification that their environment is safe should be allowed to re-boot, and advertise as such, at a minimum as part of their posted hygiene rating. This would be a big step on the way back.
It appears that infection by way of fine airborne mists (“aerosols”) is now considered the primary means by which covid-19 is spread. We can leave the salt shakers on the tables at restaurants. It’s the ventilation, filtration, and airflow that matters.
Hmmm … .
Less a loophole, more a stupid rule that invites abuse.
1 Like
No kidding. Very strange rule.
1 Like
Second reopening-for-indoor-dining announcement I’ve seen that discusses ventilation:
- We have installed MERV 13 filters within our air conditioning system and have air purifiers equipped with HEPA 13 filters throughout the restaurant.
- The windows in the upstairs Mezzanine space remain open to provide further improved ventilation.
1 Like
Well, as you might expect, all I can say is “Hear, Hear”. I hope more and more restaurants adopt similar ventilation / filtration measures.
On dining in bubbles:
On outdoor dining in NYC:
1 Like