
6ft Is Not Always Enough: How Saliva Droplets Spread Through the Air - samizdis
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/imaging/six-feet-is-not-always-enough-how-saliva-droplets-spread-through-the-air
======
conistonwater
Are they calculating how much the droplets travel, or how much viral load
someone gets at a specific distance?

This sounds confusing. If I remember correctly, R0 for the virus was around 3
before it was controlled. Is it really plausible that a virus that can spread
through droplets due to asymptomatic people breathing in the street, where
those droplets travel 6m, would have an R0 _as low as_ 3? Wouldn't it just
infect everybody immediately? What am I missing?

~~~
Retric
People who have a significant risk of death don’t care about R factor, they
just want to avoid infection.

Reasonable precautions for the vast majority of people don’t seem like enough
if you’re 70+.

~~~
perf1
Who are these people at risk exactly? I think there isn't enough talk about
it. There are studies now that show that zero carb and intermittent fasting
can reverse type 2 diabetes. But nobody seams to suggest to people at risk to
try to eat less sugar.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
I'm pretty sure the first thing people are told after being diagnosed with
type 2 diabetes is to control their carb intake.

~~~
s9w
I actually don't think that's true. But that might depend on the country,
doctors etc. Many still give the exact wrong advice of limiting fat intake,
focusing on "slow burning carbs" and all that.

------
ponker
Of course 6 feet isn’t always enough, they need a reasonable guideline that’s
also easy to implement. Most Americans have an intuitive grasp of what 6 feet
is, as the height of a “regular tall guy” and can thus estimate 6 feet much
better than 8.

~~~
raverbashing
Europe is going with 2m, while a bit longer than 6ft, I doubt it will make
much of a difference, especially in an informal setting.

~~~
kyriakos
we are only going with 2m cause its a round number almost the same 6ft

~~~
raverbashing
Yes, I know, I was just pointing out the distance is slightly bigger

------
samizdis
Source study:
[https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/05/12/2006874117](https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/05/12/2006874117)

------
klaudius
Also...

"Masks Don't Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy"

[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340570735_Masks_Don...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340570735_Masks_Don't_Work_A_review_of_science_relevant_to_COVID-19_social_policy)

~~~
chadmeister
Not peer reviewed and reads extremely politically charged. I'd hardly call
this science.

~~~
itcrowd
Agreed. Also, if respirators don't work, how come there isn't a mass infection
among doctors treating COVID-19 patients worldwide?

------
cloudc0de
Scientific studies concluding masks don't work:

[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/)

[http://tiny.cc/krfhpz](http://tiny.cc/krfhpz)

[http://tiny.cc/5sfhpz](http://tiny.cc/5sfhpz)

[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.12381](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.12381)

[https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567](https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567)

[https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747](https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747)

[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214)

~~~
tinus_hn
I checked the first link, it’s about the common cold. They test groups with
and without masks and in both groups there was one person getting ill.
Conclusion: the sample size is far too small to reach any conclusion.

Also checked the second link, it says:

There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during
illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during
illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission.

Not very convincingly concludes the opposite of the claim.

