A Concerned Scientist @BE@qoto.org

Here's the infographics on the first 4 of the components.

"The first component is the emission rate defined as the number of virus-laden particles exhaled by an infected person per unit of time."

"The second component affecting the inhalation transmission mechanism is the removal rate which can be defined as the total number of aerosolized virions removed from the air in a given time."

"The difference between the emission rate and the removal rate leads to the third component, the exposure. This component can be defined as the concentration of virions in ambient air, during a given time, at which a susceptible host comes in contact with."

"The fourth component is the cumulative or absorbed dose--meaning the total number of infectious particles inhaled and subsequently absorbed by a susceptible host during the exposure event."

"Finally, the pathogen infectious dose, the host immunological status and the specific SARS-CoV-2 variant transmissibility, contribute to the complex dose-response model which, in combination with the cumulative absorbed dose, define the host probability of infection which completes the fifth and final component."

I'll add their infographics of each of these components in the next post.

They go on to further define, and discuss, airborne transmission. I have to, again, point out that this is an important step for the WHO to acknowledge and discuss.

"Airborne or Inhalation transmission*: The process whereby aerosolized infectious respiratory particles (IRPs) are inhaled and enter the respiratory tract of a susceptible person, move through the upper and then lower parts of the respiratory tract, and can be deposited on the tissue at any point along the tract, potentially even reaching the distal alveolar region. This mode of transmission can occur when IRPs have travelled either a short or a long distance (range) after emission from an infected person or after resuspension of deposited particles from surface.

The Technical Advisory Group agreed to describe the inhalation transmission mechanism as a sequential five steps or components process with the short- and long- range transmission terms unfolding simultaneously (Figure 2)."

I'll put a brief description of each of the 5 components in the next post.

At this point I'd like to share a couple of the images. I'm not great at alt text, but I'm going to give it my best here. I am limited character-wise and was not able to simply copy-paste all of the text into the alt-text.

First up, the executive summary's context section in its entirety:

"The SARS-CoV-2 virus can spread in several ways: through zoonotic transmission, direct and indirect contact transmission, direct deposition transmission, and inhalation or airborne transmission. An increasing body of evidence [28]–[31] suggests that it is transmitted through infectious fluids released from an infected individual as particles of different sizes and quantities, such as during breathing, speaking, coughing and sneezing. While the largest particles travel downwards quite rapidly, the smaller ones remain suspended in the air for longer periods and can travel farther distances. When people are in close proximity, transmission of infectious particles can occur through direct inhalation (short-range) and deposition onto the mucous linings of the respiratory tract and ocular membranes of a susceptible host particularly in the absence of face covers and ventilation. ‘Long-range’ transmission can occur in enclosed settings when infectious particles accumulate over time in a given volume, where the concentration of virions is sufficient enough to cause infection once infectious particles are inhaled by a susceptible host."

Right off the bat we get to why I think this is so important and it's not JUST airborne transmission. A lot of time has been spent arguing methods of infection. This document acknowledges things like deposition onto the ocular membrane.

Why is this important? The science doesn't lie. Politicians and minimizers can ignore it, but, eventually they'll probably have to acknowledge it. In the meantime, you have another tool at your disposal to understand the science AND to help calculate your risk.

Would I rely on the percent given by the calculator as THE exact risk? Of course not. Do I think it's important that this document, and calculator exist? I do. I believe in science.

I knew that being in one home for as long as we have would lead to a lot of stuff. It's amazing how much you accidentally accumulate when not moving all of the time, as I'd done for most of my life.

What I wasn't prepared for was how many books we have. Geez. They're everywhere. I know my kids are well read, but it's like every corner of this house somehow has a full bookshelf, some of which we'd forgotten about over the years. "Oh look. A textbook on baking. Look over there, a whole pile of gardening books."

I have no idea how this happened.

The idea of what constitutes a "prepper" in the US has interested me for decades. There's the stereotype that you probably thought of when you read that of a right-wing, 2nd amendment dude stockpiling ammo in the woods. But the thought's occurred to me on more than one occasion over the last decade or so that "preparing" for major changes, scientifically predicted, doesn't really fit under the traditional "prepper" model. I'd never tell anyone that I'm a "prepper" not because I don't think the label necessarily fits, but, because people will automatically get one idea in their minds about it.

Anyway, after posting recently that someone, literally, whispered to me wondering if I thought long COVID was real, because they couldn't say it out loud around people at work for fear of being labeled or singled out, the same thing happened to me today about our impending move to our homestead. I guess leaving work instead of RTO really got people talking, and now I'm the COVID cautious, prepper dude?

"I wouldn't talk about this with anybody else I know, but, are you guys preppers?"

"Well, I guess you could say that. I'm not stockpiling ammo off in the woods or anything, but, years ago my wife and I spent a long time finding a property that we eventually wanted to move to that fit pretty specific criteria. For example, we have multiple fresh water springs from which we've tested the water. One of those is gravity fed to our cabin. There's water flowing through the entire property. We don't have any close neighbors. We have a greenhouse. We have all the power we need from our own property."

"I'm really worried about a lot of what's going on in the world. How do you prepare for it all?"

"Well, I don't think you really do. You can't prepare for EVERYTHING."

"COVID was your thing, then?"

"Kind of. I mean, we bought it before COVID, so it was more climate change at the time. We're moving 1000 miles north and 2000 feet up in elevation, but, lack of fresh water and other things have all had a part in it. COVID just allowed us to move while keeping our jobs. Haha. You know how that worked out for me, but, my wife's keeping her job, and yes, we can be away from the virus-laden masses."

"I want to do the same."

People keep telling me that I'm right about COVID, or climate change and they want to do what we're doing, but, it's obvious they can't even say it out loud to anyone except me. They know me, I hired most of them, and I'm no longer in a position of authority, so I guess I'm the person they whisper about at the office?

I don't know what my point is here in the end. I just wanted to document another interaction that has me wondering about things, but, what a weird societal place we're in?

Yes, climate change is real. Yes, COVID is real. Things change, and they're changing at a pace that I guess people are uncomfortable with?

Why do we still have to tiptoe around these things instead of preparing ourselves and others for changes?

I apologize if everyone else saw this article and I just somehow missed it, but, in the ongoing "Why is my pet suddenly sick" drama, here's a paper showing cat and dog(amongst other animal) transmission between animals and humans is probably more common than most people suspect.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772985023000546

If we can get over the numerous uses of the word "droplet" they do, at least, mention airborne transmission to cats:

"Cats are susceptible to airborne infection, and infected cats may transmit the virus to healthy cats living together through respiratory droplets or airborne routes"

I'm way, way beyond the belief that people would avoid COVID so that they don't kill their pets, but, to those still trying to avoid COVID, this is another reason to keep at it.

Am I the only one who assumed Blue Oyster Cult were probably all dead until they put out a new album? I apologize for telling my son, "No way. They're all dead" this morning 😬

Some things I've done in the last week:

- Chopped almost a cord of wood
- Dug a trench
- Moved appliances around
- Moved a couch
- Hiked for miles
- Bent over a dining table for a few minutes helping with a LEGO sorting project

Guess which one threw out my back so badly that I've barely moved since Saturday? Getting old is a weird experience.

It looks like @jeffgilchrist has updated his document on the impacts of COVID again. It's well worth a look over even if you've looked before. Sometimes I forget about his site(https://gilchrist.great-site.net/jeff/COVID-19/) when researching something specific, so a reminder seems like a good idea.

Also make sure you get down to the links in the "Where to learn more" section for a good place to find more published science on the subject.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jhcwz02T4AoIzipf0Z1RQkZSak0UzIm1J_J_W98gv4/edit#heading=h.em5b53xclfo5

I'm still finishing up a couple of projects with my company before I fully move on. Yesterday I was talking with co-worker about wrapping up some things and I guess word had gotten around that I'm leaving due to return to work policies. She, literally, whispered, "So you're still taking COVID seriously?"

"Yeah."

"I think you're right. My husband and son are both doctors, and they say that long COVID isn't real. They say it's for people who believe in UFOs and Big Foot."

"No, it's real. I could send you tons of research."

"I know. I read about it at night. I think you're doing the right thing."

She then changed the subject and we moved on, but, that's it. That's where this all is thanks to a feckless public health response. This is why people don't take it seriously.

I know I said just the other day that I wasn't really interested anymore and I wasn't going to get into it, and as far as Biden v Trump, I'm still not. However, two stories crossed my timeline this morning.

The first one was so wildly off-base about the so-called "rural voter" that I read it a few times just to try to figure out what they were saying. Without spending the time to look up all of the people involved, I'm going to say that this is the never-lived-in-rural-america take on it.

https://www.rawstory.com/gop-rural-voters/

I get the idea the idea that they're going for here. It's the old "Why do rural voters vote for people who laugh behind their back? All of those Ivy League educated people aren't their friends."

I get this a lot from my friends out west. It's really hard for people who have never lived in the rural south to get it. Believe me, they're not voting for people who "stab you right in the front." It's completely missing the point. It's not the performance itself that they're voting for.

This comes up a lot when people I know send me some absurd thing that Matt Gaetz does or says with a note like "Florida's finally going to be rid of this idiot!" I always write back something along the lines of "No, you really don't get it. This will make him more popular. This is what people here want." They laugh, go "Yeah, sure, whatever. Just watch. He'll lose his next election" at which point he inevitably wins by even more than he did before.

Let's take a look at the second article.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-voters-dont-care-about-winning-elections-just-owning-libs

Now we're getting somewhere. Really, all of my leftist and liberal friends, you have to understand who you're up against. The people of rural Florida in Matt Gaetz' district don't understand you any more than you don't understand them, but they're going to vote for Matt Gaetz because he meets three criteria:

He's trolling you, which makes them laugh.

He does what he wants and doesn't care about your rules and laws.

Perhaps most importantly, he "proves" their most deeply held belief that the federal government doesn't work. Why doesn't it work? Because of people like Matt Gaetz, which just proves the point. Get it?

They've been told since the Civil War that the federal government can't work. States rights, right? Don't you tell us what to do. You and your fancy educations in things we don't understand like CRT and IVF.

When the first article says "They claim Democrats are insulting, but Democrats are doing something for them and getting none of their votes." And that's the POINT. They don't want things done for them by the federal government because they don't trust it. When the federal government goes "Here's millions of dollars for improvements in your district" they read "Hello. I'm a Nigerian prince."

They don't WANT it, and even if they learned to trust it, it would break that belief inside of them where their granddaddy told them that the federal government was bad and would never work.

When a New Hampshire voter says "he liked Trump because he’s “a wrecking ball. “Our system needs to be broken," he means it literally. Take it literally.