Coronavirus
Technology Solutions
Nanofiber Media
Shows 99.9 %
Virus Capture
Efficiency
Virus Found on
HEPA Filters in
Schools in
California
Indian
Government
Issues Double
Masking
Guidelines
American
University
Professor Says
Good School
Ventilation is a
Long-Term
Benefit
Transformational
Period for
Indoor Air
Quality
Fauci Says
Public is
Misinterpreting
CDC Mask
Guidelines
____________________________________________________________________________
Nanofiber Media
Shows 99.9 %
Virus Capture
Efficiency
A recent study
conducted by
investigators
from the
University of
California at
Riverside, in
collaboration
with George
Washington
University,
discovered that
a filter made
from polymer
nano threads can
capture up to
99.9% of Coronavirus aerosols.
Results from the
study were
published in the
journal Environmental
Science &
Technology
Letters.
"Our work is the
first study to
use coronavirus
aerosols for
evaluating
filtration
efficiency of
face masks and
air filters,"
Yun Shen, a
corresponding
author on the
study said.
"Previous
studies have
used surrogates
of saline
solution,
polystyrene
beads, and
bacteriophages
-- a group of
viruses that
infect
bacteria."
For the study,
the team of
investigators
sent high
electrical
voltage through
a drop of liquid
polyvinylidene
fluoride to spin
threads about
300 nanometers
in diameter and
created a
nanofiber
filter. The
technique is
known as
electrospinning
and can be a
cheap way to
mass produce the
filters for
personal
protective
equipment and
air filtration
systems.
They then
compared the
nanofiber
filters against
surgical masks,
cotton masks and
neck gaiters to
see how well
each of them
prevented
airborne
aerosols.
Most studies up
until now have
used other
materials to
mimic both the
size and
behavior of
coronaviruses,
but the
investigators in
this study uses
an aerosolized
saline solution
and an aerosol
that contained a
coronavirus from
the same family
as COVID-19.
Findings from
the study showed
that the cotton
mask and neck
gaiter remove
around 45% to
73% of the
aerosols, while
the surgical
mask removed
around 98%.
However, the
nanofiber filter
removed almost
all of the
coronavirus
aerosols, just
about 99.9%.
"Electrospinning
can advance the
design and
fabrication of
face masks and
air filters,"
Shen said.
"Developing new
masks and air
filters by
electrospinning
is promising
because of its
high performance
in filtration,
economic
feasibility, and
scalability, and
it can meet
on-site needs of
the masks and
air filters."
Virus Found on
HEPA Filters in
Schools in
California
Kids are back in
class with
safety protocols
like physical
distancing,
masking, and
plastic barriers
throughout
classrooms. Even
so, newly
developed
surveillance
swabbing
detected the
coronavirus in
HEPA filters in
two Davis
classrooms in
the last two
weeks: one at
Korematsu
Elementary and
the other at
North Davis
Elementary.
“That’s really
scary, but I’m
glad they can
trace it back,”
said one parent.
The testing is
part of a pilot
program started
last week with
Davis Joint
Unified School
District and
Healthy Davis
Together, with
UC Davis
conducting the
testing. The
goal of the
system is to
identify a
problem before
it can spread.
“It’s basically
providing
passive testing
in place of each
child getting
tested every
single day
because it’s
monitoring any
viral activity
in the whole
room,” said Dr.
Sheri Belafsky.
Belafsky is the
medical director
for Healthy
Davis Together
and she oversees
medical
surveillance for
UC Davis Public
Health. She says
students have
been tested and
no coronavirus
has been
detected. How is
that possible?
“From the time
the swab was
collected and
processed in the
lab, the results
found and
children tested,
there is a
period of
several days and
that person’s
infection could
be waning,” she
said.
She said all
HEPA filters
that tested
positive were
replaced and
those have since
tested negative.
More proof the
threat is gone.
That’s good news
for parents who
know with kids,
the fight
against the
spread of the
coronavirus is a
daily battle.
“They end up
being close at
lunch with no
masks. It’s hard
for kids to keep
their mask on.”
Indian
Government
Issues Double
Masking
Guidelines
Even as India
continues to
fight a tough
battle against
a devastating
second wave of
the coronavirus,
the central
government has
issued fresh
guidelines on
how to curb the
spread of the
virus. In the
document, titled
"Stop the
Transmission,
Crush the
Pandemic," the
government
focuses on
measures such as
double masking,
physical
distancing, and
proper
ventilation
arrangements.
Here are more
details on this.
Saliva and nasal
discharge from
an infected
individual in
the form of
droplets and
aerosols is the
primary mode of
coronavirus
transmission,
the Indian
government's
Principal
Scientific
Adviser K
VijayRaghavan's
office said in
the guidelines
today. Though
droplets fall
within two
meters of an
infected person,
smaller aerosol
particles can
travel in the
air up to 10
meters,
according to the
document.
You should wear
a double layer
mask or an N95
mask for maximum
protection, the
guidelines say.
For double
masking, prefer
wearing a
surgical mask
and a
tight-fitting
cloth mask over
it." Ideally,
the surgical
mask should be
used only once,
but when
pairing, you can
use it up to
five times by
leaving it in a
dry place for
seven days after
one use."
Droplets emitted
by an infected
person can land
on various
surfaces and
survive there
for a long time,
the advisory
warned. It
suggested
frequent
cleaning of
high-contact
points such as
door handles,
switches, taps,
and chairs,
etc., using
disinfectants
like phenyl and
bleach.
Ventilation
The document
also highlights
the role of
well-ventilated
spaces in
reducing the
risk of
coronavirus
spread." Just as
smells can be
diluted from the
air through
opening windows
and doors and
using exhaust
systems,
ventilating
spaces with
improved
directional air
flow decreases
the accumulated
viral load in
the air,
reducing the
risk of
transmission,"
it said.
The placement of
fans is crucial
- they should
not be placed
where they can
cause
contaminated air
to flow directly
toward a person
present in the
room, according
to the advisory.
If the windows
and doors of a
room are closed,
the exhaust fans
must be turned
on "to create
the ideal
airflow for
maximum
protection from
indoor
infection."
In indoor
settings where
air conditioners
are turned on,
doors/windows
should be kept
wide open so
that clean air
can enter from
the outside and
dilute the virus
particles.
Adding an
exhaust fan is
also
recommended. “In
offices,
auditoriums,
shopping malls
etc. use of
gable fan
systems and roof
ventilators are
recommended.
Frequent
cleaning and
replacement of
filters is
highly
recommended,"
the advisory
added.
Situation
India has been
gripped by a
ferocious second
wave of the
COVID-19
pandemic,
reporting lakhs
of new
infections every
day over the
past few weeks.
In the past 24
hours, the
country logged
2,76,070 new
coronavirus
cases. With over
3,800 more
fatalities, the
death toll in
India crossed
75,000 for this
month and 2.87
lakh overall.
American
University
Professor Says
Good School
Ventilation is a
Long-Term
Benefit
“COVID-19 has
changed the way
we understand
school building
ventilation and
its importance
in keeping us
safe from
viruses and
bacteria in the
air. The
pandemic has
motivated many
school leaders
to invest in
improvements to
ventilation
systems, but the
benefits of
investing in a
safe learning
environment
extend far
beyond
protecting
children from
the coronavirus.
The evidence I
present below
suggests that
pollution
exposure is not
only a factor in
student academic
outcomes but
also a major
driver of
inequality in
outcomes between
wealthier and
lower-income
children, and
between white
and nonwhite
children.”
Claudia Persico
Assistant
Professor -
American
University
I recently
released a study (with
Kathryn Johnson)
showing that
higher air
pollution can
make people more
likely to get
sick with and
die from
COVID-19.
Because
air pollution
harms the
immune system,
it can increase
the likelihood
of infection from
airborne
diseases.
It also can lead
existing cases
of COVID-19 to
become more
severe by
harming the
immune systems
of infected
people. We used
the variation in
pollution caused
by a rollback of
environmental
enforcement
during the
pandemic to
estimate the
effects of
increased
pollution on
county-level
COVID-19 deaths
and cases. We
find that
counties with
more Toxic
Release
Inventory (TRI)
sites (local
factories or
federal plants
that emit
harmful classes
of pollution)
saw an 11.8%
increase in air
pollution on
average
following the
Environmental
Protection
Agency’s (EPA’s)
rollback of
enforcement,
compared to
counties with
fewer TRI sites.
We also find
that these
policy-induced
increases in air
pollution are
associated with
a 53% increase
in cases and a
10.6% increase
in deaths from
COVID-19.
In addition to
providing some
protection
against illness,
there is evidence that
air filters,
like those
commonly used in
modern HVAC
systems, can
limit children’s
exposure to
local air
pollution. There
is mounting
evidence that
air pollution
can harm
children’s
development and
academic
outcomes. In
another new
paper,
I (along with
Joanna Venator)
use detailed
Florida public
school data to
assess how
children’s
outcomes change
when a TRI site
opens or closes
within a mile of
their school.
The comparison
group is
composed of
students
attending
schools between
one and two
miles away from
a TRI site at
the same time in
the same zip
code. We find
that exposure to
pollutants in
schools has
significant,
negative impacts
on test scores
and being
suspended or
absent from
school.
Note that the
conditions we’re
exploring in
this study are
not unique to
Florida. There
are currently
about 21,800 TRI
sites operating
across the
United States,
and
the EPA
estimates that
59 million
people (on
average, about
19% of the
population
living in every
state) live
within one mile
of a TRI site.
Nearly 22% of
all public
schools were
within one mile
of a TRI
facility in
2016, and these
sites exist in
both urban and
rural areas.
In addition,
over 6.4 million
U.S. children
attend public
school within
250 meters of a
major roadway.
In another paper,
I (along with
David Simon and
Jenni Heissel)
compare students
who have to
switch from
elementary to
middle school or
from middle
school to high
school as they
progress through
the school
system. We
compare children
who switch from
a school that is
upwind from a
highway to a
school that is
downwind of a
highway and find
that highway air
pollution
negatively
affects
students’ test
scores,
behavior, and
absences.
We also know
that air
quality affects
children’s
performance on
the day of the
test.
Because
pollution might
make children
more
disruptive, another
recent study finds
that exposure to
pollution has
spillover
effects onto
children who are
not themselves
exposed to
pollution. Thus,
pollution can
affect
schoolchildren’s
outcomes both
directly and
indirectly.
The pandemic has
also brought
into sharp
relief the
consequences of
social
disparities,
which is a
common theme in
the literature
exploring
environmental
conditions and
student
outcomes. For
example,
children who
attend school
near a major
highway are more
likely to be low
income or
nonwhite than
children
attending school
elsewhere.
Low-income,
Black and Latino
children are
also more
likely to live
near Superfund
sites (the
worst federal
toxic waste
sites) and to attend
school near TRI
sites. It
is evident,
therefore, how
uneven exposure
to pollutants
along
socioeconomic
lines
contributes to
long-standing
achievement
gaps.
These
socioeconomic
differences
extend to the
quality of
school
facilities as
well. According
to the Government
Accountability
Office’s
national survey
of school
districts,
about 54% of
public school
districts need
to update or
replace multiple
building systems
or features in
their schools,
with heating,
ventilation, or
air conditioning
being the most
common system in
need of
attention. They
also find that
capital
construction
expenditures
were on average
$300 less per
student in
high-poverty
districts ($719
per student)
compared to
low-poverty
districts
($1,016 per
student). This
funding
disparity
reflects fewer
resources to
spend in spite
of the greater
needs, in most
cases, of
lower-income
districts.
Whereas
wealthier
districts can
make up funding
shortfalls from
the state
through raising
local taxes,
high-poverty
districts are
more likely to
rely on state
funding and have
difficulty
making up the
difference in
lean years.
Right now there
is a debate over
whether schools
should be part
of President
Biden’s
infrastructure
bill. Some are
concerned that
spending on
schools could be
wasteful or
unnecessary.
However, the
evidence
suggests that
upgrading school
buildings would
be both a timely
and wise
investment that
is likely to pay
dividends for
years to come.
Now it is time
to do the same
for indoor air
quality,
according to a
group of 39
scientists. In a
manifesto of
sorts published
Thursday in the
journal
Science, the
researchers
called for a
“paradigm shift”
in how citizens
and government
officials think
about the
quality of the
air we breathe
indoors.
The timing of
the scientists’
call to action
coincides with
the nation’s
large-scale
reopening as
coronavirus
cases steeply
decline
Americans are
anxiously facing
a return to
offices,
schools,
restaurants and
theaters —
exactly the type
of crowded
indoor spaces in
which the
coronavirus is
thought to
thrive.
There is little
doubt now that
the coronavirus
can linger in
the air indoors,
floating far
beyond the
recommended 6
feet of
distance, the
experts
declared. The
accumulating
research puts
the onus on
policymakers and
building
engineers to
provide clean
air in public
buildings and to
minimize the
risk of
respiratory
infections, they
said.
“We expect to
have clean water
from the taps,”
said Lidia
Morawska, the
group’s leader
and an aerosol
physicist at
Queensland
University of
Technology in
Australia. “We
expect to have
clean, safe food
when we buy it
in the
supermarket. In
the same way, we
should expect
clean air in our
buildings and
any shared
spaces.”
Meeting the
group’s
recommendations
would require
new workplace
standards for
air quality, but
the scientists
maintained that
the remedies do
not have to be
onerous. Air
quality in
buildings can be
improved with a
few simple
fixes, they
said: adding
filters to
existing
ventilation
systems, using
portable air
cleaners and
ultraviolet
lights — or even
just opening the
windows where
possible.
Morawska led a
group of 239
scientists who
last year called
on the World
Health
Organization to
acknowledge that
the coronavirus
can spread in
tiny droplets,
or aerosols,
that drift
through the air.
The WHO had
insisted that
the virus
spreads only in
larger, heavier
droplets and by
touching
contaminated
surfaces,
contradicting
its own 2014
rule to assume
all new viruses
are airborne.
The WHO conceded
on July 9 that
transmission of
the virus by
aerosols could
be responsible
for “outbreaks
of COVID-19
reported in some
closed settings,
such as
restaurants,
nightclubs,
places of
worship or
places of work
where people may
be shouting,
talking or
singing,” but
only at short
range.
The pressure to
act on
preventing
airborne spread
has recently
been escalating.
In February,
more than a
dozen experts
petitioned the
Biden
administration
to update
workplace
standards for
high-risk
settings like
meatpacking
plants and
prisons, where
COVID outbreaks
have been
rampant.
Last month, a
separate group
of scientists
detailed 10
lines of
evidence that
support the
importance of
airborne
transmission
indoors.
On April 30, the
WHO inched
forward and
allowed that in
poorly
ventilated
spaces, aerosols
“may remain
suspended in the
air or travel
farther than 1
meter
(long-range).”
The Centers for
Disease Control
and Prevention,
which had also
been slow to
update its
guidelines,
recognized last
week that the
virus can be
inhaled indoors,
even when a
person is more
than 6 feet away
from an infected
individual.
“They have ended
up in a much
better, more
scientifically
defensible
place,” said
Linsey Marr, an
expert in
airborne viruses
at Virginia Tech
and a signatory
to the letter.
“It would be
helpful if they
were to
undertake a
public service
messaging
campaign to
publicize this
change more
broadly,”
especially in
parts of the
world where the
virus is
surging, she
said. For
example, in some
East Asian
countries,
stacked toilet
systems could
transport the
virus between
floors of a
multistory
building, she
noted.
More research is
also needed on
how the virus
moves indoors.
Researchers at
the Department
of Energy’s
Pacific
Northwest
National
Laboratory
modeled the flow
of aerosol-size
particles after
a person has had
a five-minute
coughing bout in
one room of a
three-room
office with a
central
ventilation
system. Clean
outdoor air and
air filters both
cut down the
flow of
particles in
that room, the
scientists
reported in
April.
But rapid air
exchanges — more
than 12 in an
hour — can
propel particles
into connected
rooms, much as
secondhand smoke
can waft into
lower levels or
nearby rooms.
“For the source
room, clearly
more ventilation
is a good
thing,” said
Leonard Pease, a
chemical
engineer and
lead author of
the study. “But
that air goes
somewhere. Maybe
more ventilation
is not always
the solution.”
In the United
States, the
CDC’s concession
may prompt the
Occupational
Safety and
Health
Association to
change its
regulations on
air quality. Air
is harder to
contain and
clean than food
or water. But
OSHA already
mandates air
quality
standards for
certain
chemicals. Its
guidance for
COVID does not
require
improvements to
ventilation,
except for
health care
settings.
Ventilation is
really built
into the
approach that
OSHA takes to
all airborne
hazards,” said
Peg Seminario,
who served as
director of
occupational
safety and
health for the
AFL-CIO from
1990 until her
retirement in
2019. “With
COVID being
recognized as an
airborne hazard,
those approaches
should apply.”
In January,
President Joe
Biden directed
OSHA to issue
emergency
temporary
guidelines for
COVID by March
15. But OSHA
missed the
deadline; its
draft is
reportedly being
reviewed by the
White House’s
regulatory
office.
In the meantime,
businesses can
do as much or as
little as they
wish to protect
their workers.
Citing concerns
of continued
shortages of
protective gear,
the American
Hospital
Association, an
industry trade
group, endorsed
N95 respirators
for health care
workers only
during medical
procedures known
to produce
aerosols, or if
they have close
contact with an
infected
patient. Those
are the same
guidelines the
WHO and the CDC
offered early in
the pandemic.
Face masks and
Plexiglas
barriers would
protect the
rest, the
association said
in March in a
statement to the
House Committee
on Education and
Labor.
Anthony S. Fauci, the government’s leading infectious-disease expert, told Axios that the public is misinterpreting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s announcement last week that fully vaccinated people can go without masks indoors. “I think people are misinterpreting, thinking that this is a removal of a mask mandate for everyone. It’s not,” he told Axios. “It’s an assurance to those who are vaccinated that they can feel safe, be they outdoors or indoors.” Fauci emphasized that the health agency did not explicitly tell unvaccinated people to go without masks but instead communicated to vaccinated individuals that they will not get infected indoors or outdoors.
“People either
read them
quickly or
listen and hear
half of it. They
are feeling that
we’re saying:
‘You don’t need
the mask
anymore.’ That’s
not what the CDC
said,” he told
the news outlet.
Reaction to the
CDC’s guidance
has been
applauded by
those who say it
shows the
efficacy of
vaccinations
against the
coronavirus and criticized
by those who say
it is too soon
to forgo masks.
|