[BostonCard]

These letters in response to the article about SARS-CoV survival on various surfaces indicate how much uncertainty there is on the question of transmission.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NE...?query=TOC

It is notable that there is widespread belief that aersonolized transmission is difficult, with the exception of medical procedures that generate aerosols.  That may prove to be wrong, but I go back to the fact that if the virus was this transmissible, the R0 would be expected to be much higher.  An R0 of 2-3 (with the caveat that some believe the number to be higher) would imply mostly close contact, not casually breathing exhaled air by an asymptomatic individuals.  There will always be exceptions and unusual cases (for example, the woman who became infected despite being sheltered in place), and data is evolving fast.

BC

[BostonCard]

These letters in response to the article about SARS-CoV survival on various surfaces indicate how much uncertainty there is on the question of transmission.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NE...?query=TOC

It is notable that there is widespread belief that aersonolized transmission is difficult, with the exception of medical procedures that generate aerosols.  That may prove to be wrong, but I go back to the fact that if the virus was this transmissible, the R0 would be expected to be much higher.  An R0 of 2-3 (with the caveat that some believe the number to be higher) would imply mostly close contact, not casually breathing exhaled air by an asymptomatic individuals.  There will always be exceptions and unusual cases (for example, the woman who became infected despite being sheltered in place), and data is evolving fast.

BC