TALLAHASSEE A state appeals court this month will wade into a dispute about whether the University of Florida should refund fees to students who were forced to switch to remote learning in 2020 during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal is scheduled to hear arguments July 20 after an Alachua County circuit judge last year refused to dismiss the potential class-action lawsuit. At least two other state appellate courts have taken up similar cases from other schools and reached different conclusions.
A key issue in the cases is whether schools breached contracts by not providing on-campus services in 2020 after students had paid fees.
The University of Florida disputes that an express contract existed with plaintiff Anthony Rojas, who was a graduate student in 2020. As a result, it contends Alachua County Circuit Judge Monica Brasington should have dismissed the case.
None of the documents attached to the complaint (the lawsuit) expressly establish that UF is obligated to provide services at a certain place, in a certain manner, at a certain time, or even at all, UFs lawyers wrote in a brief at the Tallahassee-based appeals court. To the extent Mr. Rojas and others had a unilateral expectation that the fees students paid during the semesters in question would guarantee the provision of certain services, or even that fees would be expended for services to be delivered during that semester i.e., a pay-as-you-go model there is no evidence of mutual assent on that essential term. It is decidedly not an express promise on the part of UF as Mr. Rojas contended and as the circuit court found below.
But attorneys for Rojas countered in a brief that UF declares that students cannot bring claims against it for failing to provide the on-campus services for which students paid fees while maintaining that UF can put students into debt collections for failing to pay those very fees.
Put simply, UF asserts a contract exists when it wants to collect money from its students, but disavows that same contract when students seek refunds of fees they paid for unperformed services, Rojas attorneys wrote.
The case involves fees for such things as activities, transportation and athletics, not tuition. Campuses were shut down across the state in spring 2020 to try to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
Brasington did not issue a final ruling about whether UF should be required to refund portions of fees that students paid, but she refused to dismiss the case.
Generally, state agencies are shielded from lawsuits by the legal concept of sovereign immunity. But sovereign immunity does not provide protections from breach-of-contract claims. In arguing that it did not breach an express contract, UF contends the case should be dismissed because of sovereign immunity.
Numerous similar cases have been filed against other schools in Florida and across the country.
A panel of Floridas 2nd District Court of Appeal on June 1 refused to dismiss a similar case against the University of South Florida. The university last week asked the full appeals court to hear the case or to request that the Florida Supreme Court resolve the issue.
Meanwhile, the 3rd District Court of Appeal in April ordered the dismissal of a fees-refund case filed against Miami Dade College. The South Florida appeals court last month rejected a request for a rehearing in the case.
Also, a Leon County circuit judge last month tossed out a similar case against Florida State University.
Beijing Two of China's biggest cities, capital Beijing and Shanghai, got to enjoy about one month of reprieve from draconian COVID-19 restrictions, including full and partial lockdowns, after officials declared victory over the virus. But as of Thursday, both megacities were racing once again to contain outbreaks fueled by highly transmissible Omicron subvariants of the virus.
The capital reported a cluster of BA.5.2 subvariant cases, which officials said started among staff at a boutique hotel near Beijing's world-famous Great Wall area. Only about a dozen infections were confirmed by Thursday, but the local government was taking no chances.
For the first time since the start of the pandemic, Beijing has required all residents entering large public places, including museums, theaters, and gyms to show proof of vaccination, according to an official with the Municipal Health Commission. Senior citizens also now must show proof of vaccination to enter community facilities.
The new vaccine mandate comes on top of existing policies that require everyone to show a negative COVID test result from within the past 72 hours to enter any public venue. That restriction effectively forces the entire local population of the capital to get rolling PCR tests every three days.
Keeping a lid on the highly contagious subvariant is a priority for China's ruling Communist Party in part because it wants to avoid any disruption to the once-in-a-decade power transition, which is set to take place in Beijing this fall, though an exact date has not yet been announced.
Meanwhile, in the financial capital of Shanghai, 32 positive cases have been recorded, linked to a karaoke bar in the city's Putuo district. In response, city officials shut down all karaoke bars in Shanghai and there are a lot from Wednesday.
Shanghai has also intensified its mass-testing regime. Residents in 12 of the city's 16 districts were told to get two PCR tests over a three-day period, ending Thursday.
I was always ready to say yes to the COVID-19 vaccine. Id been following its development from the very beginning of the pandemic and said, again and again, that Id happily get vaccinated. Working in critical care during the first deadly wave of the virus, my team and I had yearned for any relief from the frustration and sorrow we felt. We lived in the constant presence of death and loss, treating patients without treatment options while living in fear of contracting the virus ourselves.
We needed the hope a COVID vaccine might deliver. When my employer, Northwell Health, asked for volunteers to get the shot on day one, I stepped forward to say, Yes.
It ended up being a milestone in the history of the pandemic. In the first year they were available, vaccines saved at least 19 million lives around the world. Mine may have been among the first.
Later, some people would say Id been used, coerced, even paid. But getting the first COVID-19 vaccine outside of a clinical trial was not a mistake. The only mistake was thinking that, after the injection, Id be going immediately back to work.
The day had other plans. There was a press conference, and a whirlwind of interviews, then speaking engagements. When I said, Yes, to the vaccine, I unknowingly opened my eyes to a world of possibilities and advocacy.
Risk, for example, looks different to me now.
More than 6.3 million people worldwide have died from COVID-19 so far. As of this writing, almost 549 million people have been diagnosed with it. Thats where risk and true danger existin people eschewing data and the evidence-based advice of medical professionals in favor of anger and falsehoods and fear, often fomented online.
Saying yes also gave me a renewed sense of responsibility. Ive heard so often that COVID-19 has pulled back the curtain on health inequities that I sometimes worry well accept those inequalities as an entrenched fact that we cannot undo. I take seriously the opportunity I have to support public health in underserved communities and communities of color. This is my space; Im a Black immigrant from Jamaica who came to this country to become a nurse.
For some, its uncomfortable to discuss the fact that too many communities of color in the United States lack access to acceptable health and medical care. Lets discuss it anyway. Transforming health care deserts into healthy, robust communities with affordable, high-quality resources is a massive challenge. We may not find a perfect solution but its our responsibility to say yes to conversations about how we can remove barriers and inequities in our health care system.
Sandra Lindsay waves to spectators during a parade honoring essential workers for their efforts throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, July 7, 2021, in New York.
John MinchilloAP
I felt empowered when I said yes to the COVID-19 vaccineit was more than a dose of antibodies. It represented a hopeful, new beginning. That moment has been a gift, an opportunity to grow and expand my professional purpose. I certainly didnt predict receiving a Presidential Medal of Freedom. But In some ways, it was less of a choice than it was a seamless transition. Maybe my having said, Yes, will inspire others to do the same.
More Must-Read Stories From TIME
Contact us at letters@time.com.
COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rose globally during 2021 even during a time of uneven vaccine distribution, according to a new study published earlier this week.
For the study, researchers surveyed more than 23,000 individuals across 23 countries, finding vaccine acceptance rose by 3.7 percentage points from the year earlier to 75.2 percent in 2021.
The authors noted the most common forms of hesitancy stemmed from mistrust in the science and effectiveness and safety concerns. Othercommon reasons for hesitation were rooted in personal experience, like sickness.
Our country is in a historic fight against the coronavirus. Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.
Researchers found a particular countrys mortality rate and caseload were not related to its level of hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy was reported most frequently in Russia and Nigeria in June 2021 and least frequently in China and the U.K.
But researchers said support for vaccine mandates varied widely and often depended on context.
In order to improve global vaccination rates, some countries may at present require people to present proof of vaccination to attend work, school, or indoor activities and events, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy Senior Scholar Jeffrey Lazarus said in a statement.
Our results found strong support among participants for requirements targeting international travelers, while support was weakest among participants for requirements for schoolchildren.
The authors warned that although some countries are moving away from some mitigation measures, the pandemic is not over and vaccination campaigns should continue.
Researchers at the CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy (CUNY SPH), the Barcelona Institute for Global Health, Dalhousie University and the University of Calgary were involved in the study published in Nature Communications.
World Health Organization data shows that more than 12 billion vaccines have been administered globally as of July 6.
Currently, around 222 million people in the U.S. are fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
READ MORE STORIES FROM CHANGING AMERICA
HERES WHEN ADULTS GAIN THE MOST WEIGHT: STUDY
HERE ARE THE BEST-RUN CITIES IN AMERICA: REPORT
FIVE FACTS ABOUT ABORTION YOU SHOULD KNOW
LAWSUIT CHALLENGES FLORIDA STOP WOKE ACT
MOST SAY COST OF LIVING IS HOLDING THEM BACK FROM AMERICAN DREAM
Published on Jul. 07, 2022
Following months of hardships and devastating losses in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, Sandra Lindsay, an intensive care nurse in New York, became a symbol of hope for people across the globe when she became the first person in the United States to receive a COVID-19 vaccine following emergency authorization from federal officials.
Seemingly overnight, Lindsay, who got the shot in December of 2020, became a prominent vaccine advocate, urging others to get vaccinated against COVID-19 and help curb the virus's spread.
In light of her advocacy, Lindsay will be one of seventeen recipients to be honored with the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Joe Biden.
"I'm honored to hold this place in history," Lindsay told ABC News prior to the ceremony.
In the hours following her vaccination, the image of Lindsay receiving her shot circulated rapidly across the country, as millions celebrated it as a symbolic light at the end of the tunnel after the pandemic had forced families apart.
Sandra Lindsay, left, a nurse at Long Island Jewish Medical Center, is inoculated with the COVID-19 vaccine by Dr. Michelle Chester, Dec. 14, 2020, in Queens, New York.
Pool via Getty Images
The Americans honored with the medal "demonstrate the power of possibilities and embody the soul of the nation hard work, perseverance, and faith," according to a press release from the White House "[and] have overcome significant obstacles to achieve impressive accomplishments in the arts and sciences, dedicated their lives to advocating for the most vulnerable among us, and acted with bravery to drive change in their communities and across the world while blazing trails for generations to come."
Lindsay will be honored alongside other Presidential Medal of Honor recipients, including former congresswoman Gabby Giffords, Khizr Khan, a Gold Star father and founder of the Constitution Literacy and National Unity Center, and actor Denzel Washington.
Last month, Lindsay initially missed the call from the White House informing her of the award, initially believing it was a prank call. When she learned that the honor was real, Lindsay said she was "overwhelmed" with emotions.
"I was just overwhelmed with pride, joy, gratitude and just immediately thought about what that meant for others, for people who look like me for young ladies, for black women, for immigrants, for Jamaicans, for Americans, nurses, health care workers, minorities," Lindsay said.
Nurse Sandra Lindsay, center, gives an interview after she is inoculated with the COVID-19 vaccine, Dec. 14, 2020 at the Jewish Medical Center, in Queens, New York.
Pool via Getty Images
Lindsay, who works as the director of patient care services in critical care at Northwell Health, said was met with an incredibly positive public reaction following her vaccine, with some people telling her they were inspired to get the shot because of her.
For Lindsay, who was raised in Jamaica by her grandparents and moved to the United States in 1986, the honor is beyond anything she could have imagined.
"Never in my wildest dreams did I think that I would be in this position. But I said yes. I said yes not knowing what I was getting into, but knowing that it was the right thing to do, and here I am today, so anything is possible," Lindsay said.
With 70 million eligible Americans still unvaccinated, Lindsay stressed that her advocacy work is not done.
"We have made significant strides, but [COVID-19] is still here, and it still poses a threat to you, if you are not protected. I encourage everyone to go get themselves vaccinated," Lindsay said. "If you're not vaccinated, you're still not protected."
Post-marketing surveillance of Pfizers and Modernas COVID vaccination hasidentified a possible association between its use and subsequent episodes of myocarditis and pericarditis two forms of heart inflammation. Pericarditis involves the inflammation of the sac containing the heart, whichacts as a buffer of the hearts beat and causes discomfort from all that motion when inflamed. Myocarditis is an inflammation of the middle layers of the hearts wall, and it too causes pain and may lead to the heart failing its function in fully circulating our blood. Both pericarditis and myocarditis are associated with viral infection, although the underlying cause is unknown in many cases. Both are generally self-limiting problems that resolve with medical support instead of medical intervention.
The Study
The research is based on Ontario, Canadas system for reporting adverse events after COVID immunization between December 2020 and September 2021. Reporting is mandatory for healthcare professionals and voluntary for patients or their caregivers. So we can say at the start that the total number of adverse events is undercounted, but probably not by an order of magnitude. Those cases where the patient shrugged off a twinge and didn't seek care, do notrepresent significant morbidity. There were roughly 19.7 million doses of the mRNA vaccines administered and 417 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis found in the Ontario registry.
The diagnosis of myocarditis or pericarditis can be uncertain; very few are lining up for a biopsy of their heart to provide histologic proof. The researchers categorized the uncertainty of the myocarditis and pericarditis cases using the Brighton criteria. The Brighton Collaborative, which was founded long before COVID in 2001, isan international effort to define the adverse effects of immunization. Their methodology has been adopted in many countries, including Canada. Brighton defined three levels of certainty associated with myocarditis and pericarditis: Level 1, a definite case, confirmed biopsy or MRI, Level2, and Level 3, a possible case, based upon symptoms, an abnormal EKG, and some biomarkers of inflammation not of cardiac injury (e.g., c-reactive protein). Using these definitions, the researchers identified 71% of the reported cases as meeting one of the three levels of certainty. Of these 297 cases:
More Data = Better Data
Much of this has been known since early in the mass vaccination programs but what follows comes from recognizing that percentages will change as the numerator, the number of cases, and the denominator, the number of vaccinated individuals change that is just math. More importantly, having patience enough to wait for the longer term, more defined, better information can be helpful.
The incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis decreased as the interval between vaccine dosages increased. Mixing the doses given, one of Moderna and one of Pfizer, a heterologous schedule also resulted in a reduced case rate for these adverse effects.
These results are in line with those seen in the US. But here is where our friends to the North differed:Rather than stop vaccinations or whip up a politically driven angst, they chose to change their approach when the evidence changed. They began to preferentially offer the Pfizer vaccine to the more at-risk younger males and issued guidelines that recommended a longer interval between doses.
Comparing the Adverse Effects of the Vaccine With Covid Itself
Finally, to give all these numbers some context, consider a study done on patients hospitalized with COVID in the US during a similar period. [2]
Getting it Right
Understandably, amid an evolving pandemic, we will get things wrong. It is less understandable that we would attribute these errors to evil intent.I am not suggesting that we do not act on the information we have, but that we are a bit more humble in presenting and refuting those findings as the data evolve.As with any other drug or therapy, adverse effects will inevitably be present. But it is critical to consider the effects along with the benefit of the treatment. Failure to do so can only provide slanted and incorrect information to the public, just about the last we need during the pandemic. Last word to the researchers,
Of importance, the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis following receipt of mRNA vaccines also needs to be considered in association with risks of myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 infection (i.e., higher rates of myocarditis following infection than vaccination) and the high effectiveness of mRNA vaccine products. These results will also be helpful in the ongoing contextualization of the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis following receipt of mRNA vaccines compared with the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated outcomes.
[1] Remember that these patients sought and received medical attention and may reflect an overestimate of severity. The percentages have been rounded.
[2] Again patient selection of the hospitalized overestimates the impact of myocarditis, but it is a relatively apples-to-apples comparison since the same criteria were used in the Canadian study.
Source: Myocarditis or Pericarditis Following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination JAMA Network Open DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.18505
Soldiers in the Army Reserve and National Guard who refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine wont be allowed to attend any federally funded activities, including their monthly drills, and wont receive pay or retirement credit, the Pentagon announced.
Troops refusing the vaccine, with an approved or pending exemption, could also face a reprimand or a bar from service.
The new regulations took effect on July 1 following the directive from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.
Unit commanders will be able to activate and pay soldiers for limited administrative purposes, such as receiving the vaccine, processing their exemption requests, or conducting separation procedures, Army officials said in a statement.
The order could impact an estimated 40,000 troops. It takes effect just as many reserve and national guard soldiers are heading out to attend their annual drills. The long-term impact of the Army vaccination order isnt immediately clear. The Army both full-time and reserve components is facing significant recruiting challenges.
While the Army allows soldiers to apply for exemptions, only a handful have been granted.
The U.S. Army Reserve is under federal control, so the latest order is easier to enforce. It is a different case for the U.S. Army National Guard, however. It operates under a dual-command structure. A state governor is commander-in-chief until the guard unit gets federally activated.
The Army says 87% of National Guard troops are fully vaccinated while the rate for the Army Reserve is slightly higher at 88%.
For more information, visit The Washington Times COVID-19 resource page.
Patient deaths: 1,019,083
Total vaccine doses distributed: 770,337,705
Patients whove received the first dose: 259,957,415
Patients whove received the second dose: 222,271,398
% of population fully vaccinated (both doses, not including boosters): 66.9%
% tied to Omicron variant: 100%
% tied to Other: 0%
At a glance, the pandemic picture in the United States may seem remarkably stable. The average number of new confirmed coronavirus cases per day has hardly budged for weeks, hovering between 95,000 and 115,000 a day each day in June.
A closer look shows that as public testing sites run by state and local governments have winnowed, more states have also stopped giving daily data updates, creating a foggier look at the state of virus across the country.
That comes as new federal estimates on Tuesday showed that the rapidly spreading Omicron subvariant known as BA.5 has become dominant among new coronavirus cases. As of the week ending Saturday, BA.5 made up about 54 percent of new cases in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Just a week ago, the agencys estimates had put BA.5 and BA.4, another Omicron subvariant, together as dominant, a trend experts had predicted. The new statistics, released Tuesday morning, are based on modeling and can be revised as more data comes in.
The reduction in U.S. public testing means that lab-based P.C.R. testing capacity in July will be only half of what it was in March, according to a recent estimate by Health Catalysts Group, a research and consulting firm. Even a few testing companies announced layoffs and closures last week.
The vast majority of the positive results from popular home test kits are not included in official data, and not everyone who gets infected knows or gets tested. Many Americans appear to be moving even further away from focusing on daily case counting which, to be sure, have always been an undercount of total infections as a measure of the nations pandemic health. But other Americans with risk factors have said that they feel ignored and abandoned as their governments and neighbors have sought a return to normal.
And some scientists estimate that the current wave of cases is the second largest of the pandemic.
One of my favorite lines from somebody at the C.D.C. was You dont need to count the raindrops to know how hard its raining, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in late June at a conference in Aspen, Colo. So we can tell by the half a million to a million P.C.R.s were doing every day how were doing in areas around the country.
The C.D.C.s monitoring of community risk levels shows that in its latest update, 33 percent of the American population lived in a high-risk county, in most regions outside the Northeast. In May, the map had been flipped, with the Northeast comprising most of the high-risk counties. The C.D.C. recommends wearing a mask indoors in public under such a designation.
In most of the Northeast, cases have decreased continuously throughout June, according to a New York Times database. In the South, many states have seen cases double or triple over the same time. As of Sunday, more than 113,000 new coronavirus cases are being reported each day in the United States.
Thats not really a reflection of the total amount of virus circulating in the communities, said Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health. He said that his back of the envelope estimate was about one million cases per day.
As states report less frequently, changes in the trajectory of the virus are slower to reveal themselves. Nearly every state reported the number of new coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths for five days a week or more in 2020 and 2021, but 23 states now release new data only once a week, according to Times tracking.
California, which once updated its cumulative case and death figures every weekday, now does so only twice weekly. In Florida, case and death data are released just once every two weeks. Just last week, many more public testing sites closed in Alaska, Colorado and Rhode Island; Iowa is shutting many sites by the end of next week.
Recent virus figures have hiccuped around holidays like Memorial Day and Juneteenth, during which many states often pause reporting and then restart tracking afterward, a trend that is sure to continue this week, after the Fourth of July holiday weekend.
Following the daily test count is less instructive than it was, Dr. Adalja said, citing the close link between cases and hospitalizations in the past. Todays numbers should not be treated like checking a sports teams daily standings or scores, he added.
I think testing is taking a different role, he said. Even when testing was at a different point, it has always been an underestimate.
To get a localized look at how the virus is faring, Dr. Adalja said that he has come to rely on hospitalizations as a percentage of its capacity. He also checks the C.D.C.s community levels tracker, which includes new hospital admissions and how many beds are used. He urges a shifting focus to severe disease, rather than tracking the booms and busts of cases.
Hospitalizations have increased modestly throughout June, though they remain low. Just over 33,000 people are in American hospitals with the coronavirus on an average day, and fewer than 4,000 are in intensive care. Reports of new deaths remain below 400 a day, down from the countrys daily death toll peak of more than 3,300 deaths in January 2021.
Lisa Waananen, Christine Chung, Emily Anthes and Alain Delaqurire contributed reporting.
Imagine a future with safer bars, restaurants, health clinics, and other public indoor spaces where the risk of the spread of infectious diseases such as COVID-19 is greatly minimized.
Research by Akula Venkatram, a mechanical engineering professor at the University of California, Riverside, suggests this could happen in the not-too-distant future. An important step, he said, is a simple change in the direction of the air forced through indoor gathering spaces by heating, air conditioning, and ventilation systems.
Fresh air should be emitted from floor vents, while the outgoing air should be removed with ceiling vents. Such systems would allow for a continuous upward movement of air that would most expediently carry away virus-containing microdroplets exhaled by infected people.
You don't want to have horizontal transport, which can spread viruses from person to person, Venkatram said. You should encourage vertical transport of air. It doesn't matter whether the air is coming from the top or bottom, but it's easier for it to come from the bottom because your breath is warm. So it goes up automatically. You might as well take advantage of that.
Venkatrams conclusions are based on a fresh look at data from several previous studies about the behavior of aerosols, or airborne particles, in indoor settings. Venkatram and his collaborator, Jeffrey Weil of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, published their findings and recommendations for ventilation systems last year in a paper published in Indoor Air titled Modeling Turbulent Transport of Aerosols Inside Rooms Using Eddy Diffusivity.
For his analysis, Venkatram tapped his decades of experience researching how air pollution behaves outdoors. This work includes his collaboration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop pollution dispersion models that are used by regulatory agencies to estimate the air quality impact of pollutants emitted by sources such as power plants and vehicles on roads.
Venkatram and Weil examined the transport of virus-carrying aerosols emitted from an infected person that behave as passive tracers of air motion in a room. The simple acts of breathing, talking, walking, standing up, or just moving your hands stirs ups air, and creates random turbulent motion that disperses these aerosols across a room. Consider what happens when someone lights up a cigarette, he said.
As soon as you smoke, you can see smoke going all over the place, he said. Forced or natural ventilation enhances this turbulent motion.
Venkatram and Weil used a concept called turbulent diffusivity to model transport by turbulent motion in a room. They used mathematical models to interpret data from experiments that released aerosols inside rooms with varying ventilation rates.
We looked at the transport as soon as you emit stuff, and how the concentration of aerosols falls off with distance from the source, Venkatram said. What you are breathing in depends on the number of aerosols per unit volume, multiplied by the volume you breathe in. So, the viral load depends on the total amount of viruses the dose that you inhale.The dose falls off with distance from the source, he said. The dose at 2 meters from a source is still half of that at 1 meter, he said
Venkatram said the paper does not rely on models that make simplistic assumptions about the behavior of indoor pollutants. Such models, still used by researchers today, assume that emitted aerosols are instantaneously mixed through the volume of a room so that the concentrations are equal. These models provide little guidance on the engineering of ventilation systems to reduce the spread of virus laden aerosols, he said.
Venkatram and Weil showed that an increased ventilation rate does not always lead to reduced doses of the pollutant someone may breathe. Their models suggest that ventilation, especially that creating directed air motion in the room, is not always beneficial and might make matters worse by spreading emissions.
The conclusion supports a Chinese study that blamed an air conditioning system for the spread of coronavirus in a restaurant in Guangzhou, Chinas third-largest city. Done in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study found that 10 people became infected when they sat at tables downwind of an infected person from the pandemics epicenter in Wuhan.
The results presented by Venkatram and Weil also support a body of evidence that face masks reduce the risk of infection, especially when worn by an infected person. Researchers have well established that masks prevents the high velocity ejection of liquid droplets during coughing and sneezing. What is not appreciated, the study says, is that a mask also increases the size of the puff of exhaled air, which reduces the concentration of droplets at the source, and also facilitates the subsequent dilution of the puff by turbulent eddies as it is transported across a room.
Upward ventilation would then further enhance safety by carrying away the virus-laden droplets before they can infect another person.
Header image by Getty Images.
