Is the air pollution theory that the particles somehow adhere to other, lighter 'pollution' particulate and remain airborne longer?jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:44 am More evidence is being reported, studies in progress, studies in the US, Italy, and yes China, are starting to show that transmission does occur by airborne virus. Smaller particulate packages than the so called droplets from sneezes, coughs, etc. Just exhaling produces these small particles. Still the major and most significant mechanism is droplets. This is a secondary method of transmission.
I would bet that when this is all said and done, a correlation will be found with air pollution levels. This does not mean you can't get it if you live in a relatively low pollution environment.
Disclaimer: This is not meant to scare Peanut Butters, snowflakes or Pollyannas. Feel free to ignore it if your belief system will not allow for such a possibility.
Everything I've seen suggests that yes there's tiny particulates from breathing, but it all is too heavy to remain airborne long. They don't know for sure though. But it does remain airborne long enough that a contained room full of CV infected, asymptomatic 'breathers' would indeed transmit infection easily, even if no coughing or sneezing.
I'd also doubt that Shanghai would have been so successful at muting spread if this was pollution correlated.
Seems like density would be correlated and being in contained rooms in tight proximity would be correlated (greater prevalence of such in colder months), and sure density would be correlated with pollution but not causal?
