🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

@paprika

Its not like facebook is much better

@atheprogrammer @thalweg

@atheprogrammer

Churchs in general arent usually all that tec friendly, even newer ones.

@thalweg

@Pat

> Actually sub-micron particles are created in infectious levels with every breath.

Incorrect, studies have shown normal breathing creates virtually no aerosol.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/#:~:text=The%20World%20Health%20Organization%20(WHO,2007%3B%20WHO%2C%202014).

> Even when all the H2O has evaporated from a particle, there can remain lipids and the protein shell of the virus itself can help keep it viable.

No viruses dont persist outside of droplets. That would be true airborne status and there is simply no evidence to suggest that is the case as shown by the following study:

"If SARS-CoV-2 could travel in the air, outside liquid droplets, it might be carried longer distances on air currents. There is currently no robust scientific evidence to support airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2."

Morawska L, Cao J. Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2: The world should face the reality. Environment International. 2020 Apr;139:105730. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105730.

@torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

@underlap thanks.

@Pat

sub micron particles are considered aeresol. They arent really produced in any detectable quantity with normal breathing, though they arent non existant. However unless its humid out they are going to evaporate super fast as well.

The point here is that airborne isnt airborne in the same sense as smoke.

@torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

@icedquinn

Now this I can support. I'd finally have a good excuse to buy a rebreather :)

@NEETzsche @Pross988 @mkljczk @ducheng @Pat @torresjrjr

@Pross988

If you cared about other people you'd duct tape a plastic bag over your head and then put a mask over it

@icedquinn @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng @Pat @torresjrjr

@Pat

To put it in perspective, according to studies normal breathing produces virtually no aerosol and no risk (unlike smoke). Which that alone should give you a good idea why airborne doesnt really mean airborne in the usual sense you think of.

@torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

@Pat

The maller the droplet size the shorter it can persist since it will dry out faster. larger droplets fall out of the air quicker and also dont persist. Smoke will persist much longer in terms of smell as they are smaller, dont dry out, and most importantly are ionized.

@torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

@underlap You cant follow anyone from any server? You are using the web interface?

@icedquinn

Agreed. Like i said i wasnt trying to negate your point. Just pointing out some relevant nuance.

@NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng @Pat @torresjrjr

@icedquinn

I agree, I wasnt saying its acceptable just pointing it out.

@NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng @Pat @torresjrjr

@icedquinn

One point of clarity, the co2 levels are acceptable for short term exposure but considered harmful only for long term exposure.

@NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng @Pat @torresjrjr

@Pat

Fair.

Though to be clear airborne diseases arent o literally airborne. That is the virus only persists in droplets. So smoke is going to carry way more than the virus would.

@torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

@underlap Not sure why your account being new would matter.

@NEETzsche

Depends on the journal. There are many great journals, some stink. Journals arent about validating conclusions, they just make sure the data and quotes and citations are all valid. Its up to the scientist reading it to evaluate the weight of the study itself based on the content. The journal just assures the reader that there arent bald face lies.

@icedquinn @mkljczk @ducheng @Pat @torresjrjr