4 ms·
You should almost certainly be going outside for the other health benefits. There's very little risk of transmission if you're outside and 2m away from other p
by JabavuAdams 6y ago
You should almost certainly be going outside for the other health benefits.
There's very little risk of transmission if you're outside and 2m away from other people, even if intermittently you're closer than that. Even more so if one or the other of you is masked.
Places to be more concerned about are bottlenecks like lobbies and elevators on the way to/from outside.
- azinman2 6y agoMy understanding is that it hasn’t been shown for elevators. I think this is because of the required time to breathe in a minimal viral load. Do you have evidence otherwise?
- icedchai 6y agoYou're in a confined space, breathing the same air as other people. Also, given the frequent traffic of elevators, consider what you may breath in from previous occupants. This sounds risky to me. I hate touching elevator buttons during normal times. I'd wear masks and gloves.
- JabavuAdams 6y agoNo evidence, just caution.
- andy_ppp 6y agoYes I heard planes as well surprisingly safe relative to choir practice. Environments where lots of droplets are created are less safe...
- azinman2 6y agoMy understanding is that planes have very effective air filtration and movement systems. Choir practice likely would not, and involved people generating aerosols continuously.
- notatoad 6y agoplanes have two things going for them: good air circulation with filtration, and mask-wearing is well enforced.
- newsbinator 6y agoI wonder how safe it is to queue at an airport, walk to the plane on a ramp among 100 yawning, coughing others, and reverse that process on the other side. It may negate the safety of the actual airplane trip, or it may not.
- Ensorceled 6y ago> My understanding is that it hasn’t been shown for elevators. I think ... Where are you getting this understanding? You are asking for evidence while providing none yourself...
- azinman2 6y agoWell the absence of anything is the default, so the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. I had read that somewhere in studying transmissions in NYC where elevators are common. I don’t remember where, it was a while ago.
- Ensorceled 6y agoThere is a lot of evidence that close quarters, inside contact is very risky for transmission; every country in the world is operating under that assumption, indeed most are passing laws based on this. There is zero reason to believe that elevators ... both close quarters and inside would some how be an exception. You've claimed that elevators are an exception to the established guidelines without evidence and are now claiming that that other, well evidenced, claim some how needs additional support to be applied to elevators.
- azinman2 6y agoBecause it’s not just distance but time, often being suggested to be 15 minutes: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/public-health-recommendations.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/public-health-...
- jschwartzi 6y agoIt really depends on what the potential hazards are for the claim being correct versus the claim being incorrect. If the claim is that you can't get it from sharing an elevator, I would say the hazards if that claim is wrong are much greater than if that claim is correct. So, from a risk-management perspective, without any evidence, it's much better to assume that you can get COVID-19 from sharing an elevator until enough evidence accumulates to demonstrate that you can't. If you assume you can, the worst that happens is that you wait for another elevator. But if you assume you can't and you actually can, then you get COVID-19.