5 ms·
The headline is very misleading. The actual text contains the relative risk of fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is considered low compared with direct con
by hashhar 6y ago
The headline is very misleading. The actual text contains
the relative risk of fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is
considered low compared with direct contact, droplet
transmission, or airborne transmission 1, 2. However, it
is not clear what proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections are
acquired through surface transmission.
- abtinf 6y ago“Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection.”
- cortic 6y ago120 items on my average delivery, assuming a driver or stacker is infected that could mean every item is contaminated. I touch them 1-2 times to put them away, 3-4 times as i open and use the items.. So that could be 720 'touches', and that may be cheating as i am counting my many fingers as 1 and i don't live alone. So each contaminated delivery could risk infection as much as 1 in 14 (10,000/720). Through this pandemic i have had 21 deliveries. The twenty minutes it takes to wash them seems a very reasonable precaution.
- pbourke 6y agoDo you also sanitize your door knob, handle, pantry door handle, fridge/freezer handle, faucet controls, etc? Merely washing your hands when you’re done stowing items seems to be a better strategy. Also it doesn’t stand to reason that you treat each item in your grocery delivery as having disjoint probability of harboring infectious virus. That’s clearly not true in the real world.
- cortic 6y agoI sanitize the items in the garage, as i fill a sanitized crate, then my hands, then lift them into the house. Its quick and easy, it also allows me to reduce contact with the driver. To be honest i massively underestimated how often i touch some of these items in the first few days, coffee jars alone get touched 40+ times, jam and butter 12+, bread 18+, diluting squash 14+. even if i wash my hands after stowing away and subtract that number I'd probably be left with an average number of touches well over 6 after stowing.
- valarauko 6y agoI assume these numbers are for the lifetime of the product. Perhaps a more reasonable assumption would be to only consider touches within the first 3 days, since the surface contamination is essentially non-viable past that point.
- bgarbiak 6y agoI’m not sure you can count the probability this way. Each touch is a separate event, and for each touch you have 1 in 10000 chance of infection. So, it’s 1 * 720 / 10000 * 720.
- cortic 6y agoMaybe its not that accurate to count it that way, but 1 in 10,000 would mean to the layman that every 10,000 times you do this you should expect 1 case of C19, and i do this at least 720 times at every delivery. With more than 20 deliveries through the pandemic last year i have potentially touched 14,400 contaminated items which would practically guarantee a case of C19. Now i know not all of these would be contaminated, but i don't know which or how much. And since delivery drivers in my area rarely wear masks even at the house, i don't have a high amount of confidence in any delivered items. -To be honest i massively underestimated how often i touch some of these items in the first few days, coffee jars alone get touched 40+ times, jam and butter 12+, bread 18+, diluting squash 14+.
- 0x72 6y agoIt's around 23.69% if my math is correct. I mean, it's not nothing, but I wouldn't say "practically guarantee".
- bgarbiak 6y agoIf you touch a parcel a second time then the first time doesn't count to anything. It's 1/10k again. It's like with a lottery: you can buy a coupon every day for years and win nothing, because every draw resets your chances.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- isoskeles 6y agoThe actual text also contains > Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection [7], [8], [9]. How is that not only misleading, but "very" misleading? The headline appears directly in the text almost word-for-word. And the conclusion I drew from the headline seems about right. At worst, I think someone could miss the context of "each contact" with a contaminated surface, but I still wouldn't call this very misleading.
- yread 6y agoBut what is the probability of becoming infected after a direct contact with an infected person. Surely, it's < 1. EDIT: I mean if an infected postman gives you a package what is the ratio that you will get infected by direct contact versus the surface of the package? Assuming you won't wash your hands. 10:1?