Airborne transmission course for the unfold of COVID-19 four months in the past Dr. Rajesh Jain covid-19
aerosol contamination Identifying airborne transmission because the dominant course for the unfold of COVID-19 Renyi Zhang, ProfileYixin Li, Annie L. Zhang, ProfileYuan Wang, and Mario J. Molina Significance We have elucidated the transmission pathways of coronavirus ailment 2019 (COVID-19) throughstudying the fashion and mitigation measures withinside the3 epicenters. Our consequencesdisplay that the airborne transmission course is notably virulent and dominant for the unfold of COVID-19. The mitigation measures are discernable from the traits of the pandemic. Our evaluationfamous that the distinction with and with out mandated face-masking represents the determinant in shaping the traits of the pandemic. This defensivedegreenotably reduces the wide variety of infections. Other mitigation measures, together with social distancing carried outwithinside the United States, are inadequatethrough themselves in shieldingthe general public. Our paintingsadditionally highlights the need that sound technological know-how is crucial in decision-making for the modern and destiny public fitness pandemics. Abstract Various mitigation measures had beencarried out to combat the coronavirus ailment 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, consisting ofextensivelyfollowed social distancing and mandated face masking. However, assessing the effectiveness of these intervention practices hinges at theexpertise of virus transmission, which stays uncertain. Here we display that airborne transmission is notably virulent and represents the dominant course to unfold the ailment. By studying the fashion and mitigation measures in Wuhan, China, Italy, and New York City, from January 23 to May nine, 2020, we illustrate that the affects of mitigation measures are discernable from the traits of the pandemic. Our evaluationfamous that the distinction with and with out mandated face-masking represents the determinant in shaping the pandemic traitswithinside the3 epicenters. This defensivedegreeon my ownnotablydecreased the wide variety of infections, this is, through over 75,000 in Italy from April 6 to May nine and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May nine. Other mitigation measures, together with social distancing carried outwithinside the United States, are inadequatethrough themselves in shieldingthe general public. We finish that carrying of face mask in public corresponds to the handiestmethod to save you interhuman transmission, and this less expensive practice, at the side of simultaneous social distancing, quarantine, and make contact with tracing, represents the maximumpossiblycombatingpossibility to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic. Our paintingsadditionally highlights the reality that sound technological know-how is crucial in decision-making for modern and destiny public fitness pandemics. Keywords: COVID-19 virus aerosol public fitness pandemic The novel coronavirus outbreak, coronavirus ailment 2019 (COVID-19), which turned into declared a virulent diseasethrough the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has inflamed over four million human beings and triggeredalmost 300,000 fatalities over 188 international locations. The in depthattempt is ongoing internationalto set uppowerfulremedies and expand a vaccine for the ailment. The novel coronavirus, named as intense acute breathing syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), belongs to the own circle of relatives of the pathogen this isliable forbreathingcontaminationrelated to the 2002–2003 outbreak (SARS-CoV-1) . The enveloped virus carries a positive-experience single-stranded RNA genome and a nucleocapsid of helical symmetry of ∼one hundred twenty nm. There exist numerousdoable pathways for viruses to be transmitted from man or woman to man or woman. Human atomization of virus-bearing debrishappens from coughing/sneezing or even from regular breathing/speakmethrough an inflamedman or woman. These mechanisms of viral dropping produce huge droplets and small aerosols , that are conventionally delineated at a length of five μm to signify their awesome dispersion efficiencies and houseinstances in air in addition to the deposition stylesalongside the human breathing tract. Virus transmission happensthru direct (deposited on persons) or oblique (deposited on objects) touch and airborne (droplets and aerosols) routes. Large droplets without problems settle out of the air to motiveman or woman/item contamination; in comparison, aerosols are successfully dispersed withinside the air. While transmission thru direct or obliquetouchhappens in a briefvariety, airborne transmission thru aerosols can arise over an prolonged distance and time. Inhaled virus-bearing aerosols deposit at oncealongside the human breathing tract. Previous experimental and observational research on interhuman transmission have indicated a bigposition of aerosols withinside the transmission of many breathing viruses, consisting of influenza virus, SARS-CoV-1, and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) . For example, airborne coronavirus MERS-CoV exhibited a sturdyfunctionality of surviving, with approximately 64% of microorganisms ultimate infectious 60 min after atomization at 25 °C and 79% relative humidity (RH) . On the opposite hand, speedy virus decay happened, with handiestfive% survival over a 60-min technique at 38 °C and 24% RH, indicative of inactivation. Recent experimental research have testedthe stableness of SARS-CoV-2, displaying that the virus stays infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces as much as days. Several parameters possiblyimpact the microorganism’s survival and shipping in air, consisting of temperature, humidity, microbial resistance to outsidebodily and organic stresses, and sun ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Transmission and infectivity of airborne viruses also aredepending onthe dimensions and awareness of inhaled aerosols, which alter the amount (dose) and sample for breathing deposition. With ordinary nasal breathing (i.e., at a pace of ∼1 m⋅s−1), inhalation of airborne viruses ends in direct and non-stop deposition into the human breathing tract. In particular, great aerosols (i.e., particulate count number smaller than 2.five μm, or PM2.five) penetrate deeply into the breathing tract or evenattaindifferentessential organs. In addition, viral dropping is depending on the tiers of contamination and varies among symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers. A latestlocatingconfirmed that the best viral load withinside thehigherbreathing tract happenson the symptom onset, suggesting the height of infectiousness on or earlier than the symptom onset and good sized asymptomatic transmission for SARS-CoV-2. The COVID-19 outbreak is notablyextrareported than that of the 2002/2003 SARS, and the ailmentmaintains to unfold at an alarming chargeinternational, regardless ofsevere measures taken throughmany nations to constrain the pandemic. The large scope and importance of the COVID-19 outbreak mirrornow no longerhandiest a notably contagious nature howeveradditionallyextraordinarilygreen transmission for SARS-CoV-2. Currently, the mechanisms to unfold the virus continue to be uncertain, speciallythinking about the relative contribution of the touch vs. airborne transmission routes to this worldwide pandemic. Available epidemiological and experimental evidence, however, implicates airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 thru aerosols as a capabilitycourse for the spreading of the ailment. Distinct Pandemic Trends withinside the Three Epicenters To advantageperception into the mechanism of the virus transmission routes and determine the effectiveness of mitigation measures, we analyzed the fashion of the pandemic international from January 23 to May nine, 2020. The COVID-19 outbreak first of all emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. The numbers of showed infections and fatalities in China ruledthe worldwidefashionfor the duration of January and February 2020, however thewill increasewithinside the newly showedinstances and fatalities in China have exhibited sharp declines considering the fact that February. In comparison to the curve pulling down in China, the ones numbers in differentinternational locations have elevated sharply considering the fact thatthe start of March. The epicenter shifted from Wuhan to Italy in early March and to New York City (NYC) in early April. By April 30, the numbers of showed COVID-19 instances and deaths, respectively, reached over 200,000 and 27,000 in Italy and over a million and 52,000 withinside the United States, in comparison to approximately 84,000 and four,six hundred in China . Notably, the curves in Italy show off a slowing fashionconsidering the fact that mid-April, even as the numbers withinside theinternational and the USpreserve to growth. Remarkably, the latesttraitswithinside the numbers of infections and fatalities withinside theinternational and withinside the United States show offputting linearity considering the fact thatthe start of April. Understanding the Impacts of Face Covering Compared to the simultaneous implementation of measures in China, intervention measures had been successively carried outwithinside the western international (Fig. 2A), offering an possibility for assessing their relative effectiveness. We quantified the consequences of face-maskingthrough projecting the wide variety of infections primarily based totallyat theinformationprevious toenforcingusing face mask in Italy on April 6 and NYC on April 17. Such projections are affordablethinking about the incredible linear correlation for the informationprevious to the onset of mandated face masking. Our evaluationsuggests that face-maskingdecreased the wide variety of infections through over 75,000 in Italy from April 6 to May nine and through over 66,000 in NYC from April 17 to May nine. In addition, various the correlation from 15 d to 30 d previous to the onset of the implementation famous little distinctionwithinside the projection for each places, due to the excessive correlation coefficients (SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Notably, the traits of the contamination curves in Italy and NYC comparison to the oneswithinside theinternational and withinside the United States (Fig. 1C), which display little deviation from the linearity because of the non-implementation of face-masking measures globally and nationally, respectively. The incapability of social distancing, quarantine, and isolation on my own to scale down the unfold of COVID-19 is likewiseglaring from the linearity of the contamination curve previous to the onset of the face-masking rule in Italy on April 6 and in NYC on April 17 (Fig. 2 B and C). Hence, the distinction made throughenforcing face-maskingnotably shapes the pandemic traitsinternational. Dominant Airborne Transmission We similarly elucidated the contribution of airborne transmission to the COVID-19 outbreak throughevaluating the traits and mitigation measures for the duration of the pandemic international and throughthinking about the virus transmission routes (Fig. four). Face masking prevents each airborne transmissions throughblockading atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols and make contact with transmission throughblockading viral dropping of droplets. On the opposite hand, social distancing, quarantine, and isolation, at the side of hand sanitizing, limittouch (direct and oblique) transmission however do now no longershieldtowards airborne transmission. With social distancing, quarantine, and isolation in areainternational and withinside the United States considering the fact thatthe start of April, airborne transmission represents the handiestfeasiblecourse for spreading the ailment, while mandated face maskingisn’t alwayscarried out. Similarly, the airborne transmission additionally contributes dominantly to the linear growthwithinside thecontaminationprevious to the onset of mandated face-masking in Italy and NYC (Fig. 2 B and C and SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Hence, the specificcharacteristic of face-maskingto dam atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols bills for the notablydecreased infections in China, Italy, and NYC (Figs. 1–3), indicating that airborne transmission of COVID-19 represents the dominant course for contamination. A Policy Perspective The governments’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have to this point differed notablyinternational. Swift moves to the preliminary outbreak had been undertaken in China, as meditatedthroughalmost simultaneous implementation of numerouscompetitive mitigation measures. On the opposite hand, the reaction to the pandemic turned intousuallygradualwithinside the western international, and implementation of the intervention measures happenedhandiest consecutively. Clearly, the responsiveness of the mitigation measures ruled the evolution, scope, and importance of the pandemic globally (Figs. 1 and 2). Curbing the COVID-19 is basednow no longerhandiest on decisive and sweeping moveshoweveradditionally, critically, at themedicalexpertise of the virus transmission routes, which determines the effectiveness of the mitigation measures (Fig. five). In the US, social distancing and stay-at-domestic measures, at the side of hand sanitizing (Fig. five, direction A), had beencarried outfor the duration of the early degree of the pandemic (20). These measures minimized brief–varietytouch transmission however did now no longersave you long-variety airborne transmission, liable for the inefficient containing of the pandemic withinside the United States (Figs. 1 and 3). Mandated face masking, together withthe onescarried out in China, Italy, and NYC, efficaciouslyavoided airborne transmission throughblockading atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols and make contact with transmission throughblockading viral dropping of droplets. While the blended face-masking and social distancing measures presentedtwinsafetytowards the virus transmission routes, the timing and collection in enforcing the measures additionally exhibited awesomeeffectsfor the duration of the pandemic. For example, social distancing measures, consisting ofmetropolis lockdown and stay-at-domestic orders, had beencarried outproperlyearlier than face maskingturned into mandated in Italy and NYC (Fig. five, direction B), and this collection left an prolonged window (28 d in Italy and 32 d in NYC) for in large part uninterrupted airborne transmission to unfold the ailment (Figs. 2 and 3). The simultaneous implementation of face masking and social distancing (Fig. five, direction C), together with that undertaken in China, turned intomaximum optimal, and this configuration, at the side ofwidespreadchecking outand make contact with tracing, turned intoliable for the curve pulling down in China (Fig. 1). Also, there possibly existed remnants of virus transmission after the implementation of regulatory measures, due toinstanceswhile the measures had beennow no longersensible or had been disobeyed and/or imperfection of the measures. Such limitations, that have beenemphasisedthrough the WHO (1), spurred on arguableperspectivesat the validity of carrying face mask to save you the virus transmission for the duration of the pandemic (30). However, it’s farincredible that the constraints of mitigation measures on my own contributed dominantly to the worldwide pandemic fashion, as exemplified through the achievement in China. Our paintingsindicates that the failure in containing the propagation of COVID-19 pandemic internationalis basically attributed to the unrecognized significance of airborne virus transmission (1, 20). Fig. five. Download powerpoint Fig. five. Mitigation paradigm. Scenarios of virus transmission below the distancing/quarantine/isolation degreehandiest (direction A), the measures with distancing/quarantine/isolation observedthrough face masking (direction B), and the measures with simultaneous face masking and distancing/quarantine/isolation (direction C). The brief-dashed arrows label viable remnants of virus transmission because ofinstanceswhile the degreeisn’t alwaysviable or disobeyed and/or imperfection of the degree. Conclusions The insufficientunderstanding on virus transmission has necessarily hindered the improvement of powerful mitigation rules and resulted withinside the unstoppable propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic (Figs. 1–3). In this paintings, we display that airborne transmission, speciallythru nascent aerosols from human atomization, is notably virulent and represents the dominant course for the transmission of this ailment. However, the significance of airborne transmission has now no longer been taken into consideration in status quo of mitigation measures throughauthorities authorities (1, 20). Specifically, even as the WHO and americaA Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have emphasised the prevention of touch transmission, each WHO and CDC have in large partleft out the significance of the airborne transmission course (1, 20). The modern mitigation measures, together with social distancing, quarantine, and isolation carried outwithinside the United States, are inadequatethrough themselves in shieldingthe general public. Our evaluationfamous that the distinction with and with out mandated face-masking represents the determinant in shaping the traits of the pandemic international. We finish that carrying of face mask in public corresponds to the handiestmethod to save you interhuman transmission, and this less expensive practice, at the side ofwidespreadchecking out, quarantine, and make contact with tracing, poses the maximumin all likelihoodcombatingpossibility to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic, previous to the improvement of a vaccine. It is likewisecriticalto emphasise that sound technological know-howmust be efficaciously communicated to policymakers and mustrepresent the topbasis in decision-making amid this pandemic. Implementing ruleswith outa systematicfoundationshouldcause catastrophic consequences, specially in mild of tries to reopen the economic system in many nations. Clearly, integration amongtechnological know-how and coverage is important to the components of powerful emergency responses through policymakers and preparedness throughthe general public for the modern and destiny public fitness pandemics. WhatsAppFacebookTwitterShare
Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19
Renyi Zhang, ProfileYixin Li, Annie L. Zhang, ProfileYuan Wang, and Mario J. Molina
Significance
We have elucidated the transmission pathways of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by analyzing the trend and mitigation measures in the three epicenters. Our results show that the airborne transmission route is highly virulent and dominant for the spread of COVID-19. The mitigation measures are discernable from the trends of the pandemic. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face-covering represents the determinant in shaping the trends of the pandemic. This protective measure significantly reduces the number of infections. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. Our work also highlights the necessity that sound science is essential in decision-making for the current and future public health pandemics.
Abstract
Various mitigation measures have been implemented to fight the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, including widely adopted social distancing and mandated face covering. However, assessing the effectiveness of those intervention practices hinges on the understanding of virus transmission, which remains uncertain. Here we show that airborne transmission is highly virulent and represents the dominant route to spread the disease. By analyzing the trend and mitigation measures in Wuhan, China, Italy, and New York City, from January 23 to May 9, 2020, we illustrate that the impacts of mitigation measures are discernable from the trends of the pandemic. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face-covering represents the determinant in shaping the pandemic trends in the three epicenters. This protective measure alone significantly reduced the number of infections, that is, by over 75,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. We conclude that wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with simultaneous social distancing, quarantine, and contact tracing, represents the most likely fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work also highlights the fact that sound science is essential in decision-making for current and future public health pandemics.
The novel coronavirus outbreak, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, has infected over 4 million people and caused nearly 300,000 fatalities over 188 countries. The intensive effort is ongoing worldwide to establish effective treatments and develop a vaccine for the disease. The novel coronavirus, named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), belongs to the family of the pathogen that is responsible for respiratory illness linked to the 2002–2003 outbreak (SARS-CoV-1) . The enveloped virus contains a positive-sense single-stranded RNA genome and a nucleocapsid of helical symmetry of ∼120 nm. There exist several plausible pathways for viruses to be transmitted from person to person. Human atomization of virus-bearing particles occurs from coughing/sneezing and even from normal breathing/talking by an infected person. These mechanisms of viral shedding produce large droplets and small aerosols , which are conventionally delineated at a size of 5 μm to characterize their distinct dispersion efficiencies and residence times in air as well as the deposition patterns along the human respiratory tract. Virus transmission occurs via direct (deposited on persons) or indirect (deposited on objects) contact and airborne (droplets and aerosols) routes. Large droplets readily settle out of the air to cause person/object contamination; in contrast, aerosols are efficiently dispersed in the air. While transmission via direct or indirect contact occurs in a short range, airborne transmission via aerosols can occur over an extended distance and time. Inhaled virus-bearing aerosols deposit directly along the human respiratory tract.
Previous experimental and observational studies on interhuman transmission have indicated a significant role of aerosols in the transmission of many respiratory viruses, including influenza virus, SARS-CoV-1, and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) . For example, airborne coronavirus MERS-CoV exhibited a strong capability of surviving, with about 64% of microorganisms remaining infectious 60 min after atomization at 25 °C and 79% relative humidity (RH) . On the other hand, rapid virus decay occurred, with only 5% survival over a 60-min procedure at 38 °C and 24% RH, indicative of inactivation. Recent experimental studies have examined the stability of SARS-CoV-2, showing that the virus remains infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days.
Several parameters likely influence the microorganism’s survival and delivery in air, including temperature, humidity, microbial resistance to external physical and biological stresses, and solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Transmission and infectivity of airborne viruses are also dependent on the size and concentration of inhaled aerosols, which regulate the amount (dose) and pattern for respiratory deposition. With typical nasal breathing (i.e., at a velocity of ∼1 m⋅s−1), inhalation of airborne viruses leads to direct and continuous deposition into the human respiratory tract. In particular, fine aerosols (i.e., particulate matter smaller than 2.5 μm, or PM2.5) penetrate deeply into the respiratory tract and even reach other vital organs. In addition, viral shedding is dependent on the stages of infection and varies between symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers. A recent finding showed that the highest viral load in the upper respiratory tract occurs at the symptom onset, suggesting the peak of infectiousness on or before the symptom onset and substantial asymptomatic transmission for SARS-CoV-2.
The COVID-19 outbreak is significantly more pronounced than that of the 2002/2003 SARS, and the disease continues to spread at an alarming rate worldwide, despite extreme measures taken by many countries to constrain the pandemic. The enormous scope and magnitude of the COVID-19 outbreak reflect not only a highly contagious nature but also exceedingly efficient transmission for SARS-CoV-2. Currently, the mechanisms to spread the virus remain uncertain, particularly considering the relative contribution of the contact vs. airborne transmission routes to this global pandemic. Available epidemiological and experimental evidence, however, implicates airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols as a potential route for the spreading of the disease.
Distinct Pandemic Trends in the Three Epicenters
To gain insight into the mechanism of the virus transmission routes and assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures, we analyzed the trend of the pandemic worldwide from January 23 to May 9, 2020. The COVID-19 outbreak initially emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. The numbers of confirmed infections and fatalities in China dominated the global trend during January and February 2020, but the increases in the newly confirmed cases and fatalities in China have exhibited sharp declines since February. In contrast to the curve flattening in China, those numbers in other countries have increased sharply since the beginning of March. The epicenter shifted from Wuhan to Italy in early March and to New York City (NYC) in early April. By April 30, the numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths, respectively, reached over 200,000 and 27,000 in Italy and over 1,000,000 and 52,000 in the United States, compared to about 84,000 and 4,600 in China . Notably, the curves in Italy exhibit a slowing trend since mid-April, while the numbers in the world and the United States continue to increase. Remarkably, the recent trends in the numbers of infections and fatalities in the world and in the United States exhibit striking linearity since the beginning of April.
Understanding the Impacts of Face Covering
Compared to the simultaneous implementation of measures in China, intervention measures were successively implemented in the western world (Fig. 2A), providing an opportunity for assessing their relative effectiveness. We quantified the effects of face-covering by projecting the number of infections based on the data prior to implementing the use of face masks in Italy on April 6 and NYC on April 17. Such projections are reasonable considering the excellent linear correlation for the data prior to the onset of mandated face covering. Our analysis indicates that face-covering reduced the number of infections by over 75,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and by over 66,000 in NYC from April 17 to May 9. In addition, varying the correlation from 15 d to 30 d prior to the onset of the implementation reveals little difference in the projection for both places, because of the high correlation coefficients (SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Notably, the trends of the infection curves in Italy and NYC contrast to those in the world and in the United States (Fig. 1C), which show little deviation from the linearity due to the non-implementation of face-covering measures globally and nationally, respectively. The inability of social distancing, quarantine, and isolation alone to curb the spread of COVID-19 is also evident from the linearity of the infection curve prior to the onset of the face-covering rule in Italy on April 6 and in NYC on April 17 (Fig. 2 B and C). Hence, the difference made by implementing face-covering significantly shapes the pandemic trends worldwide.
Dominant Airborne Transmission
We further elucidated the contribution of airborne transmission to the COVID-19 outbreak by comparing the trends and mitigation measures during the pandemic worldwide and by considering the virus transmission routes (Fig. 4). Face covering prevents both airborne transmissions by blocking atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols and contact transmission by blocking viral shedding of droplets. On the other hand, social distancing, quarantine, and isolation, in conjunction with hand sanitizing, minimize contact (direct and indirect) transmission but do not protect against airborne transmission. With social distancing, quarantine, and isolation in place worldwide and in the United States since the beginning of April, airborne transmission represents the only viable route for spreading the disease, when mandated face covering is not implemented. Similarly, the airborne transmission also contributes dominantly to the linear increase in the infection prior to the onset of mandated face-covering in Italy and NYC (Fig. 2 B and C and SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Hence, the unique function of face-covering to block atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols accounts for the significantly reduced infections in China, Italy, and NYC (Figs. 1–3), indicating that airborne transmission of COVID-19 represents the dominant route for infection.
A Policy Perspective
The governments’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have so far differed significantly worldwide. Swift actions to the initial outbreak were undertaken in China, as reflected by nearly simultaneous implementation of various aggressive mitigation measures. On the other hand, the response to the pandemic was generally slow in the western world, and implementation of the intervention measures occurred only consecutively. Clearly, the responsiveness of the mitigation measures governed the evolution, scope, and magnitude of the pandemic globally (Figs. 1 and 2).
Curbing the COVID-19 relies not only on decisive and sweeping actions but also, critically, on the scientific understanding of the virus transmission routes, which determines the effectiveness of the mitigation measures (Fig. 5). In the United States, social distancing and stay-at-home measures, in conjunction with hand sanitizing (Fig. 5, path A), were implemented during the early stage of the pandemic (20). These measures minimized short-range contact transmission but did not prevent long-range airborne transmission, responsible for the inefficient containing of the pandemic in the United States (Figs. 1 and 3). Mandated face covering, such as those implemented in China, Italy, and NYC, effectively prevented airborne transmission by blocking atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols and contact transmission by blocking viral shedding of droplets. While the combined face-covering and social distancing measures offered dual protection against the virus transmission routes, the timing and sequence in implementing the measures also exhibited distinct outcomes during the pandemic. For example, social distancing measures, including city lockdown and stay-at-home orders, were implemented well before face covering was mandated in Italy and NYC (Fig. 5, path B), and this sequence left an extended window (28 d in Italy and 32 d in NYC) for largely uninterrupted airborne transmission to spread the disease (Figs. 2 and 3). The simultaneous implementation of face covering and social distancing (Fig. 5, path C), such as that undertaken in China, was most optimal, and this configuration, in conjunction with extensive testing and contact tracing, was responsible for the curve flattening in China (Fig. 1). Also, there likely existed remnants of virus transmission after the implementation of regulatory measures, because of circumstances when the measures were not practical or were disobeyed and/or imperfection of the measures. Such limitations, which have been emphasized by the WHO (1), spurred on controversial views on the validity of wearing face masks to prevent the virus transmission during the pandemic (30). However, it is implausible that the limitations of mitigation measures alone contributed dominantly to the global pandemic trend, as exemplified by the success in China. Our work suggests that the failure in containing the propagation of COVID-19 pandemic worldwide is largely attributed to the unrecognized importance of airborne virus transmission (1, 20).
Mitigation paradigm. Scenarios of virus transmission under the distancing/quarantine/isolation measure only (path A), the measures with distancing/quarantine/isolation followed by face covering (path B), and the measures with simultaneous face covering and distancing/quarantine/isolation (path C). The short-dashed arrows label possible remnants of virus transmission due to circumstances when the measure is not possible or disobeyed and/or imperfection of the measure.
Conclusions
The inadequate knowledge on virus transmission has inevitably hindered the development of effective mitigation policies and resulted in the unstoppable propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic (Figs. 1–3). In this work, we show that airborne transmission, particularly via nascent aerosols from human atomization, is highly virulent and represents the dominant route for the transmission of this disease. However, the importance of airborne transmission has not been considered in establishment of mitigation measures by government authorities (1, 20). Specifically, while the WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have emphasized the prevention of contact transmission, both WHO and CDC have largely ignored the importance of the airborne transmission route (1, 20). The current mitigation measures, such as social distancing, quarantine, and isolation implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face-covering represents the determinant in shaping the trends of the pandemic worldwide. We conclude that wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracing, poses the most probable fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to the development of a vaccine. It is also important to emphasize that sound science should be effectively communicated to policymakers and should constitute the prime foundation in decision-making amid this pandemic. Implementing policies without a scientific basis could lead to catastrophic consequences, particularly in light of attempts to reopen the economy in many countries. Clearly, integration between science and policy is crucial to the formulation of effective emergency responses by policymakers and preparedness by the public for the current and future public health pandemics.
The diabetesasia is the advocate for the people currently living with diabetes Burden & NCDs Risk. Global Diabetes Walk campaign remind us to Prevent diabetes.