4 ms·
> 1) Transmission via surfaces is thought to be important (afaik). According to Hendrik Streeck, a leading researcher in Germany, this may not be the case: htt
by HSO 7y ago
> 1) Transmission via surfaces is thought to be important (afaik).
According to Hendrik Streeck, a leading researcher in Germany, this may not be the case: https://youtu.be/VP7La2bkOMo?t=231 https://youtu.be/VP7La2bkOMo?t=231
They are working on a more formal study of this but indications are that the viruses that other teams have found on surfaces may be "dead" (in the sense that they cannot actually replicate anymore and therefore are not bioactive relatively soon after leaving host organisms).
Video only in German, sorry, sure this will get publicized internationally if the study confirms the indications.
- xenonite 7y agoas you say it _may_ not be the case. So, as long as no one knows for sure...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- xenonite 7y agoThis totally contradicts another study [1]. They found that the virus is "viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days (depending on the inoculum shed)." [1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc2004973 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc2004973
- HSO 7y agothat's only a letter not a paper. and they only measured the quantity, not whether the viruses they found after x hours could actually still replicate.
- xenonite 7y agoThank you for the hint (in the reference [1], the measurement done as in [2], which states "Collected aerosols were analysed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and by virus titration"), although I then don't get why the paper [1] writes that the viruses are "infectious". [1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc2004973 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc2004973 [2] https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES2013.18.38.20590 https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.E...