5 ms·
That's not the conclusion, and cherry-picking those sentences is misleading because makes it sound like the article is citing a totally inconclusive paper. The
by re 6y ago
That's not the conclusion, and cherry-picking those sentences is misleading because makes it sound like the article is citing a totally inconclusive paper. The next sentence is "The balance of evidence, however, seems inconsistent with aerosol-based transmission of SARS-CoV-2 particularly in well-ventilated spaces."
- gojomo 6y agoThat "particularly in well-ventilated spaces" is doing a lot of work. In normal times, people spend a lot of time with other people in not-very-well-ventilated spaces - including, unfortunately, many conference-rooms, classrooms, small shops, bars/nightclubs, etc. So in all those actual places, Covid-19 is aerosol-transmissible. Also, in just the few weeks since that JAMA discussion, more actual examples of Covid-19 almost certainly transmitted by aerosols have been compiled; see for instance study/stories linked at: https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1293276767042416640 https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1293276767042416640
- IncRnd 6y agoI didn't use the word "conclusion". The article does conclude with the sentence I quoted as well as what you quoted. If you honestly read what I wrote, you would see that what I wrote is in the linked page, as is what you wrote, and the sentence from each of our posts is orthogonal to the support that was being sought for the article. I was not restating the conclusion, but showing how the original article was quoting support from a place that did not support what was being said.