General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIt's Time to Talk About Covid-19 and Surfaces Again
BETH KALB WAS worried about the pews. This summer, the century-old Catholic church she attends in a small town outside Minneapolis had, like many places, reopened its doors with new rituals of disinfection. Kalb had quickly noticed the side effects. The varnish on the pews had begun to wear, and the wood was often sticky with disinfectant, so the volunteer cleaners had started using soap and water to remove the tacky build-up. They were weeks in, and it had already come to cleaning off the cleaner. Plus, all those chemicals couldnt be good for the people who were spritzing and wiping down the worship space after each use. As a nurse, Kalb knew the importance of handwashing, but this all seemed like a bit much. It was certainly too much for the wood.
Snip
Worrying about the small stuff exhausts people from focusing on things that do matter. There are all sorts of ways to imagine what might go wrong. Maybe a person feels so confident in the disinfection methods around them that they eat indoors without a mask, despite the much more substantial known risks. Or perhaps someone feels they dont need to quarantine themselves after traveling because they wore disposable gloves and booties over their shoes on the plane. When you ask more of people than what is needed, they grow tired of doing what actually matters, Marcus says. Her advice: Keep it simple.
That sort of clear, simple guidance is hard to come by. Since The Lancet publication, Goldman has become a consultant and therapist of sorts for people who are questioning the utility of overly rigorous disinfection, but who are unsure of what to make of the scientific evidence. Hes been in touch with administrators at a local school that planned to close once a week for a deep clean, but who werent paying attention to their ventilation systems. He has fielded inquiries from people who still leave their groceries out for days, and who barely leave the house, encouraging them to find a healthier balance. He may be able to change minds one at a time, he reasons, or at least help people put the risks in perspective. It worked, he says, on his mother-in-law. But behaviors are hard to shift, especially when the decision is made by committee. The tendency, in the absence of firm guidance to do otherwise, is to cater to the most cautious.
In Minnesota, Kalb, who is one of his acolytes, says her concerns about the pews, and the lack of evidence driving the deep cleaning, were carefully considered by the church reopening committee. But her fellow parishioners advised caution. The daily disinfection was part of a list of changes for safe reopening, including cordoning off rows for social distancing and a sign-up process to enable contact tracing. It was safest, the committee decided, to continue doing it all, much like every other nearby church and school and store was doing. After all, Kalb couldnt point to a specific study that said fomite transmission was never happening. And there was news going around of an outbreak at a church in Texas. It was like, OK, we dont want to be that church, she says. The church now uses a misting machine to spray disinfectant, which requires less active wiping.
Snip
https://www.wired.com/story/its-time-to-talk-about-covid-19-and-surfaces-again/
Good long read. Makes a lot of sense
lapfog_1
(29,223 posts)6 days a week we all attend school and work online, why does going to church and sitting in those uncomfortable pews require us to do it in person?
going to church right now is like signing up for a short cruise on the USS Petri Dish once a week
marmar
(77,091 posts)Not all. Lots of people are doing these things in person now.
lapfog_1
(29,223 posts)NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)Why people go to church at all confounds me these days.
If a church is pushing people to come in person, they are part of the Death Cult.
ananda
(28,876 posts)When just the gathering itself is what spreads Covid,
mostly through the air.
This is like thinking you can treat headlice with tweezers
or something.
Hugin
(33,206 posts)"This is like thinking you can treat headlice with tweezers."
Exactly, what I'd like to know is how the COVID virus could be controlled on surfaces in a large scale without manual cleaning or mechanically breaking up the pathogen.
Hugin
(33,206 posts)There is a formula out there governing what passive measures would need to be taken to reach a reliable confidence that an often or continually occupied space is free of any pathogens.
Right now for the COVID virus that equation doesn't seem practical. Heating? (140 F/190 F - to be sure) Not practical. Leaving an area unoccupied? (9+ hrs) Not practical.
The only passive item left seems to be UV light. I haven't seen any studies on this virus, but, it's effective against everything over a period of time. Is it seconds? minutes? I'd doubt it takes hours.
Unfortunately, UV does cause damage to surfaces like wood and fading in colorized and print surfaces. I'd like to see some specific guidelines or a study.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,898 posts)getting into the environment and being bad for everything.
The constant sanitizing of surfaces is almost totally unnecessary. Just like washing all your fruits and veggies from the market with soap and water in unnecessary and possibly harmful.
Reasonably frequent handwashing with regular soap and water, wearing a mask all the time when out in public, wearing it correctly, and maintaining social distance. Those are the things that stop the spread. Not mindless sanitizing.