The virus is NOT airborne - WHO

[TheReelSlimShady]

So the WHO have officially stated that the virus is NOT airborne as has been stated many times :

twitter.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898

Their recommendation is to keep 1 metre apart , not 2 metres as many countries have been using (including in the UK).

Does this change anything? I guess it may calm the anxiety of picking up the virus when out and about doing exercise if someone gets a bit too close, or in the supermarket.

Hearhoovesthinkzebras

The link to the article posted by FatAlbert, explains it better than I ever could.

Because this virus is new and a bit of an unknown quantity, err on the side of caution is the message.

To be fair, the guidance document does say that these measures are for our own protection :

"It is your choice to decide whether to take the measures we advise"

so, grim though it is, my new hobby is cleaning (and Mumsnetting) rather than walking!

Hopefully, one day we'll look back on this as a bad dream.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras I think there's a risk to anybody going outdoors, due to things like, say, being a careful 2m apart from people, but tripping over and crashing into someone. Or passing someone you didn't realise was lurking irresponsibly in a doorway having a fag, who exhales just as you're passing. Or someone irresponsibly not keeping an eye on their child, who comes up and grabs your hand, thinking you're their mum.

Shielding is to super-protect you from accidental transmission, which can happen however careful you are.

It feels like we are being shielded because they don't really know how this is transmitted and so they are erring on the side of caution which does then make me sceptical about organisations saying definitely it isn't transmitted in this way.

A small amount of transmission is expected even during lockdown. There's no way of preventing that. You're being protected from human error, really.

I do not know about Spain, but Italy has a rather old population and obviously this has a direct effect on the number of deaths.
I suspect that total lockdown has been necessary for the whole of the country in order to limit the spread to the central and southern regions that have a less efficient health service.
I do not think it has spread more because Italians are affectionate but because families tend to live near and there is a lot of inter generational contact. Total lockdown of Lombardy is dated 4 weeks ago and this would explain the fact that the virus is stillprogressing.
As to China, I suspect that quite a lot of infected did not reach hospitals and died at home.

Weloveoptimus that comes from the one and only test reported where they also concluded on some surfaces. The test was stopped after 3h but it was in lab conditions (no idea what conditions exactly). In normal, especially outdoor conditions with wind, rain, daylight, is is very unlikely droplets containing the virus would remain suspended for anywhere near as long.
There’s so much of if, but, unlikely, likely, potentially... a 3 year old knows more about Father Christmas than the entire scientific community in the whole world. Us even less so.

I think this subject has highlighted how vitally important it is that official bodies choose their wording carefully and offer further explanation where things may be ambiguous.

On the other airborne thread, I was trying to explain things I had posted in the context of airborne being interpreted in two ways - broadly that to some it may mean in the air all the time, to others propelled through the air by some means such as coughing and lingering for an amount of time, and I ended up in a bit of a spat because I copied and pasted from the NHS website that the exact means of transmission wasn't completely certain so I said I was covering all the bases as far as possible. The bit I copied and pasted doesn't seem to be there now, but it was before, so maybe the new information has caused a change.

I would rather be told "We don't know X Y or Z with complete certainty yet so take these precautions and we'll keep you posted" in any situation, than be told "It's this" followed by a retraction, and it means the communicator remains more credible - just my personal preference of course.

On our local Police FB page the other day a post was put up by PCs stating that they had sent a woman home from the local beauty spot because she had the virus. Most commenters were calling for flogging and name and shame, even prison, baying for absolute blood. A few of us asked how did they know someone in the community had the virus for sure? Did she tell them? Did she have symptoms? Did she show proof - of course we were all in absolute agreement that if she had symptoms she should not be out - no question. But local testing has been restricted to those in ICU / seriously ill enough to be admitted, and people clamouring for tests and not quite ill enough for hospital have been denied. There were accusations of nit picking and lack of support for the police which was absolutely not true - they are doing exactly what must be done of course - but I thought it wrong to state with certainty someone has the virus if actually they only have symptoms, unless they whipped out medical evidence. Language and how things are reported are important in times like this I feel.

Viruses are an amazing structure - are they even alive?

Just a capsule that can get into a cell, and use the cell's mechanism to reproduce itself.

And killed effectively by something as simple as soap.

Maybe we should just take our own soap and water out with us when we go somewhere.

How can folk say that testing is restricted to only those hospitalised: I don't think BJ or Prince Charles have been hospitalised. There are a few scientists on twitter who say they were confirmed + and they didn't get hospitalised. Something else is going on about who gets tested.

Viruses are 'active' or inactive rather than alive/dead as far as I know. DC (cancelled GCSE biology exam this year) tells me viruses are not alive b/c they don't respire.

Well, I assume certain prominent members of society are a different can of fish, but my friend has come out of two weeks strict home isolation with symptoms and it sounds like she really had it quite badly - when she followed 111 instructions at the beginning she was taken from the hospital car park to the designated area for suspected cases. She was given a chest X ray which showed "something" - the doctor said very simply it could be a bad chest infection or it could be CV19 but impossible to know without a test and she was sent home with treatment - anti-biotics and oral steroids to cover both bases I assume. She was told directly that only those admitted to hospital were being tested, and then it changed to only those in ICU via reports from friends who are HCPs . My assumption up to that point had been that the symptomatic would be tested, but apparently not. A negative test would have been helpful even if it took a few days. She had to barricade herself in her bedroom leaving her vulnerable DP alone and her two pre-teen children to be managed remotely by the pair of them. They have survived, but we'll never know if it was CV19 or not. Which also skews the numbers for general research and tracking Oh, and her ex DP (child's father) had been travelling recently, taken the kids to London etc and showing no symptoms but even so......

It may be changing now but this was the testing protocol here two weeks ago.

There is a new test that is already in production which hopefully will be made available to the general public. For now as I understand the NHS are only testing two categories of people, those that have died, or are in intensive care. Then those that are classed as the elite: Prince Charles, Borris, etc... they obviously get put before frontline NHS workers. In the coming weeks as the new test is more and more available hopefully the UK will change tack and start testing on mass scale. That is what Korea has done to slow the spread, they tested as many people as they could and isolated the clusters.

Ragged you just reminded me of first conversation with Ds about viruses he said the same. Then I sent link to how long they stay active.

The WHO are lying and full of shit?! hmm

I for one am relieved.

X
Me too! This is definitely a good news for people who have to work, i.e. in warehouses, food production lines etc. They don’t have a possibility to practice social distancing.

If something is not airborne that doesn't mean you can't catch it if the person coughs on you. Just that you are not likely to catch it by walking past the spot where they were walking a bit later on.

So we still need social distancing.

Still good news, as some people kept 100ft distance. Coughing and sneezing - use the the tissue or sleeve, but people still have to work.

@Grobagsforever

FFS Mumsnet. Can those of you who are thick enough to think you know better better than the WHO pls suspend your read-write access to the internet, you don't deserve it.
🤣🤣🤣🤣

dr. katrina lythgoe epidemiologist at Oxford University was just on BBC news at time stamp 14:36 onwards.

Q. Is this virus airborne?
Dr.Lythgoe A: it depends what we call airborne. We know it can spread through droplets like coughing and sneezing that's why we need to be careful with close contacts. There is some evidence that it can spread in the form of aerosols with are likely to stay in the air in a room for a little bit longer.

It does depend on the definition of airborne. Given that it’s a matter of degree as a pp said WHO or other would have to define.

Airborne surely doesn't mean spread through human coughing and sneezing?

CrapTVAddict

Have any of your detractors come back to applaud your for your insight and discernment of this issue?

It's highly unlikely any of them will but keep doing you 🙋‍♀️