# Great opinion piece on aerosol transmission of Covid-19 in the NY Times



## asp3 (Jul 30, 2020)

Once again this article may not be free, but it might be as well.  The article is written by a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech.  She provides links to peer reviewed published articles supporting her conclusions and also references pre-print (not yet peer reviewed) published articles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage


----------



## StarSong (Jul 30, 2020)

asp3 said:


> Once again this article may not be free, but it might be as well.  The article is written by a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech.  She provides links to peer reviewed published articles supporting her conclusions and also references pre-print (not yet peer reviewed) published articles.
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage


Very interesting.  Thanks for posting the link, @asp3.  (I have a subscription to NYT, so not sure if the piece is behind a paywall.)


----------



## Sunny (Jul 30, 2020)

Scary stuff, asp.  Pretty much what I suspected, but this pretty much confirms it. 

So, although the masks and keeping social distances are probably the most important thing we can do, we should also be aware that the virus can hover in the air as well.  All the more reason to delay the reopening of classrooms, restaurants, shops, etc.  We want to go back to "normal," but it sounds like there will be no normal until the vaccine arrives.


----------



## PopsnTuff (Jul 30, 2020)

My thoughts all along that its in the air too and lingers in spots anywhere it wants to.....


----------



## MarciKS (Jul 30, 2020)

asp3 said:


> Once again this article may not be free, but it might be as well.  The article is written by a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech.  She provides links to peer reviewed published articles supporting her conclusions and also references pre-print (not yet peer reviewed) published articles.
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage


@asp3 what does "not peer reviewed" mean?


----------



## asp3 (Jul 31, 2020)

MarciKS said:


> @asp3 what does "not peer reviewed" mean?



It means it hasn't yet undergone a review by others who work with similar subjects.  Certain journals only publish peer reviewed articles because such articles meet a higher standard and more likely to be accurate.  Peer reviews can comment on the methodology, mathematical analysis or the conclusions presented in an article.


----------



## MarciKS (Jul 31, 2020)

asp3 said:


> It means it hasn't yet undergone a review by others who work with similar subjects.  Certain journals only publish peer reviewed articles because such articles meet a higher standard and more likely to be accurate.  Peer reviews can comment on the methodology, mathematical analysis or the conclusions presented in an article.


*so it may be wrong? *


----------



## asp3 (Jul 31, 2020)

MarciKS said:


> *so it may be wrong? *



Yes, there is always that possibility, but generally when someone submits a paper they have gone over it several times with their team and they tend to be very sure their conclusion is correct.  The paper provides all of the details and data that back up their finding so that it can be reviewed by peers for their feedback so they can determine if the methodology was reasonable, the data seems correct and that the conclusion based on the previous two portions makes sense and seems correct.

Since the Corona virus is so new and studies have only been completed to the point of being able to be written up and published a lot of what we'll be hearing about will be non-peer reviewed papers.

The big difference between these non peer reviewed studies and the anecdotal reports the group of doctors presented is that they have not written up a paper with their methodology, data and conclusions.  I haven't seen anything about their writing up their experiences in a way that can be peer reviewed which is the way studies need to be presented to be accepted by the rest of the scientific community.


----------



## StarSong (Aug 1, 2020)

asp3 said:


> Yes, there is always that possibility, but generally when someone submits a paper they have gone over it several times with their team and they tend to be very sure their conclusion is correct.  The paper provides all of the details and data that back up their finding so that it can be reviewed by peers for their feedback so they can determine if the methodology was reasonable, the data seems correct and that the conclusion based on the previous two portions makes sense and seems correct.
> 
> Since the Corona virus is so new and studies have only been completed to the point of being able to be written up and published a lot of what we'll be hearing about will be non-peer reviewed papers.
> 
> The big difference between these non peer reviewed studies and the anecdotal reports the group of doctors presented is that they have not written up a paper with their methodology, data and conclusions.  I haven't seen anything about their writing up their experiences in a way that can be peer reviewed which is the way studies need to be presented to be accepted by the rest of the scientific community.


Providing methodology not only allows peer review of the original study, but the opportunity for repeatability of the same methods.  Repeatablility by other researchers is how scientists prove the conclusion wasn't unintentionally reached due to an uncontrolled or unnoticed variable, a weird one-off that doesn't appear to recur, a random skewing due to small sample size, or outright fraud.


----------

