Surface Contact Spread of COVID is Real

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

Last edited Tue Apr 6, 2021, 09:40 PM - Edit history (8)

Bolded lines are from
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html

Many people are thinking that the risks from surfaces is near zero, due to a recent CDC report.
When you look, and think, deeper at the data, you see the the risks are real.

The article mentions,
Each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 ( risk of infection)

What if you touch a hundred contaminated surfaces a day. Doors, light switches, microwave door, put some dishes away, handle someone else's phone, faucet handles.

10,000 divided by 100(touches per day) = 1 in 100 ( risk of infection per day ).
So, in just 100 days, you are infected.
In just over 3 months, you are infected.

EDIT: After posters rightfully pointing out that some of my conclusions are wrong. It is wrong to say "you are infected", you might get lucky! I put it this way for drama. Embellished. But the average is either right or close. Also some say, less than 10,000, but as pointed out below, there is some indication that the less than 10,000 is an underestimate)

EDIT 2:
I did a sample of 1,000 , the median person had COVID before day 67
The AVERAGE amount of days before a person caught COVID was 100, so about 3 months.
The luckiest person, of the 1,000 had COVID on before day 721
102 people of the 1,000, so more than 10%, had COVID by day number 10.93
BTW, I believe they included surfaces that just had a person breath in the same room. Contamination by airborne particles.



This line shows that surface spread is real.
Hand hygiene is a barrier to fomite transmission and has been associated with lower risk of infection


This mentions efficiency of surface to hands and then to mouth.
But what about the efficiency of a pacifier or a shared cigarette or silverware.
The efficiency would be much higher, along with the risk of infection.
The efficiency of transference of virus particles from fomite surfaces to hands and from hands to mucous membranes on the face



This next line seems to suggest that much of the risk was calculated using outdoor environments, while later, in the same article mention that the surface risks are much less in the outdoor environment.
Some studies estimated exposure risks primarily using outdoor environmental SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification data.

[oldsoftie]

1. That would assume you're never washing your hands between any of those "touches"

Plus, a Covid particle ingested instead of inhaled is far less likely to give you Covid

[ProfessorGAC]

22. Far, Far, Far Less Likely

The enzymes in saliva & the pH both lead to delipidization of viruses, and the reactions to denature the protein are very fast.
Full ingestion, even more so. The pepsin and hydrochloric acid in the stomach creates a very virus unfriendly environment. Lipids react readily with chlorine donors at the functional (acyl) group. Fracturing any double bonds in the nucleic acids in viral RNA is a very easy & rapid reaction.
The risk of infection from ingestion is orders of magnitude lower than from migration from hands to inhalation pathways.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

37. I like your thinking

“When infected saliva is swallowed or tiny particles of it are inhaled, we think it can potentially transmit SARS-CoV-2 further into our throats, our lungs, or even our guts."

Per
https://www.contagionlive.com/view/convalescent-plasma-with-more-covid-19-antibodies-is-safe-and-effective

[ProfessorGAC]

43. The Chemistry Doesn't Work For Me

They have found viral remnants in fecal matter, but almost no virus.
I'm not a virologist, but I am a retired physical organic chemist (PhD, 1980) and I don't see how the virus can avoid very simple mechanism that would negate their capability to replicate.
So, in the gut doesn't work for me.
Also, virus have extremely low vapor pressure. Once suspended in saliva, the probability of reintroduction into the airstream seem extremely low. The water in saliva has orders of magnitude more vapor pressure, and codistillation is extraordinarily unlikely.
Contact transmission from transference to near the respiratory intakes is a reasonable mechanism, but the risk is minimal compared to inhalation.
The chemistry & physics do not support making this into a major issue.

[oldsoftie]

48. Thank you for putting it into real scientific terms.

There's NO WAY i could have said it like THAT!!

[Hugin]

54. This whole area of viral transmission has occupied my thoughts quite a bit recently...

I can't say exactly why.

I've even pestered some more knowledgeable than I. They unanimously concur with what you say. Viruses are incredibly vulnerable to destruction in an adverse environment and the converse is true once they've entrenched themselves in a favorable environment. This is because they are actually protected by the immune systems guarding the cell they are invading for reproduction. It verges on being counter intuitive.

Their worst enemy is a warm, humid, and bright sunshiny day. Like most chemical arrangements the cooler, dryer, and darker it is, the longer they can retain their composition and therefore their virulence.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

87. Viral Transmission information in post #86 just below here

Last edited Thu Apr 8, 2021, 03:04 PM - Edit history (1)

And thanks for the shoutout about the simulation!

[Hugin]

88. You should consider making your simulation an OP unto itself.

Fascinating and informative.

I knew you'd figure it out.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

86. Sars 2 Loves the Mouth

It actually likes to live in the salivary gland!
____________________________

Study shows how SARS-CoV-2 infects cells in mouth, possibly leading to oral symptoms
Mouth may transmit virus to lungs, digestive system
March 25, 2021

our study shows that the mouth is a route of infection as well as an incubator for the SARS-CoV-2

https://www.ada.org/en/publications/ada-news/2021-archive/march/study-shows-how-sars-cov-2-infects-cells-in-mouth-possibly-leading-to-oral-symptoms

___________________________________


The potential of the virus to infect multiple areas of the body might help explain the wide-ranging symptoms experienced by COVID-19 patients, including oral symptoms such as taste loss, dry mouth and blistering. Moreover, the findings point to the possibility that the mouth plays a role in transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to the lungs

This comes from a GOV website and speaks of the ADA findings
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/scientists-find-evidence-novel-coronavirus-infects-mouths-cells
___________________________________________


In the new study, posted Oct. 27 to the preprint database medRxiv, researchers predicted which mouth tissues might be most vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2

"This research mightily underscores the importance of the public health measures we know are effective — masks, social distancing and handwashing — whether you have symptoms or not," Byrd said. In terms of how oral infection fits into the big picture of COVID-19, "there is much to learn about where SARS-CoV-2 begins, travels within our bodies and finally is cleared," he said.

This is, I believe, the same researchers as above, but shows an earlier awareness.


https://www.livescience.com/oral-infection-coronavirus-spread.html

[we can do it]

2. That's crazy.

[onenote]

3. What is the likelihood that someone will touch 100 contaminated surfaces a day

Let alone every day.

[Yavin4]

25. Unless they have a severe case of OCD. n/t

[Withywindle]

51. Well, let's see. Before COVID my daily work routine was like this

Leave home. Get on bus. Will touch machine that reads fare card, a seat, probably a pole or strap to hang on to. Transfer to train. Touch machine that reads fare card, seat, probably a pole or strap to hang on to. Get to work. Open office door handle. Press elevator button to my floor. At work, I'll likely touch: my own desk and work station, likely a few employees' desks and work station (I'm a supervisor and sometimes I do basic system troubleshooting work), the door handles in the washroom, the refrigerator door handle in the break room, the break room table, the vending machine, my own supervisor's door handle if we have a meeting. A door handle, products, and counter if I go to the Walgreen's on break or a restaurant for lunch. I'll be touching that door handle and elevator buttons every time I come and go out of the building, which I do multiple times a day.

Repeat the exact commute process but in reverse on the way home.

Every day. In the third largest city in the US.

It's definitely possible.

[onenote]

61. And what is the likelihood that all -- or even most of those surfaces are contaminated?

[Withywindle]

62. Considering that CTA serves about a million people every day

I'd say the chances are not terribly low.

I don't know how many people walk into my Loop office building every day. I know that several hundred work there. There are classes for kids that bring in hundreds of children and parents all day every day. They all use the same elevator buttons and doors.

The busy Walgreens that usually has a line at the checkout snaking halfway back through the store? Serves thousands every day.

So...I think that it's very likely someone with COVID has touched something, especially if they're asymptomatic.

Would they shed enough virus to infect someone else by touch? I don't know. Most scientists I've read seem to think the risk is small but it's not zero.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

65. Contamination by respiration

I believe they included surfaces that just had a person breath in the same room. Contamination by airborne particles.

During high infection periods, you are right in my opinion. The likelihood that most of those surfaces would count as contaminated surfaces. In fact, they would probably be high risk surfaces.

[CrispyQ]

4. I have ALWAYS washed my hands as soon as I return home from public. -nt

[Ocelot II]

5. That's not the way it works.

If there is a 1/10,000 chance of infection (that is, live viruses) on a particular surface, that doesn't mean that if you touch two surfaces you now have a 2/10,000 chance of infection, or if you touch 10,000 surfaces in three months you will definitely be infected. The probability itself does not accumulate. Also from the CDC:

Data from surface survival studies indicate that a 99% reduction in infectious SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses can be expected under typical indoor environmental conditions within 3 days (72 hours) on common non-porous surfaces like stainless steel, plastic, and glass. However, experimental conditions on both porous and non-porous surfaces do not necessarily reflect real-world conditions, such as initial virus amount (e.g., viral load in respiratory droplets) and factors that can remove or degrade the virus, such as ventilation and changing environmental conditions. They also do not account for inefficiencies in transfer of the virus between surfaces to hands and from hands to mouth, nose, and eyes. In fact, laboratory studies try to optimize the recovery of viruses from surfaces (e.g., purposefully swabbing the surface multiple times or soaking the contaminated surface in viral transport medium before swabbing). When accounting for both surface survival data and real-world transmission factors, the risk of fomite transmission after a person with COVID-19 has been in an indoor space is minor after 3 days (72 hours), regardless of when it was last cleaned.

[Celerity]

63. Thanks for posting, beat me to it. I was going mental over the poor maths.

You prize is a bust of Euclid.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

64. median person had COVID before day 67

Below are 100 people.
The number in each row represents how long it took for that person to get COVID by touching 100 surfaces a day. BTW, they included surfaces that just had a person breath in the same room, I believe. Contamination by airborne particles.
Also, I never saw the actual "contaminated surface" requirement when I skimmed articles 7, 8 & 9

First, let me say that when I did a sample of 1,000 , the median person had COVID before day 67

The AVERAGE amount of days before a person caught COVID was 100, so about 3 months.
( I thank you for the award)
The luckiest person, of the 1,000 had COVID on before day 721

Here is a sample of 100 random people
The number in each row represents how long it took for that person to get COVID by touching 100 surfaces a day.

0
3
3
4
5
6
9
11
12
12
13
14
15
16
19
19
19
19
20
21
21
22
25
28
29
33
34
34
36
39
39
40
41
41
42
42
43
45
46
47
47
48
48
54
55
57
60
64
68
72
72
77
79
83
83
84
85
85
86
86
92
94
95
97
100
106
117
119
127
130
139
149
153
159
166
167
168
171
172
172
173
176
177
179
185
196
242
264
265
273
281
311
315
320
331
336
373
446
543
601

[Voltaire2]

70. Each surface has to be infected.

The cdc claim was 1:10000 infected surface contacts.

Your data is off by several orders of magnitude.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

77. Magnitude

Not necessarily.

I believe that the articles the CDC links to, talk about contamination as lightly as if someone with COVID breathed in the same building, and a few virus particles fell on all surfaces, sort of how dust settles. These types of surfaces were considered contaminated.

Also, some of the studies were done using outdoor surfaces that were acknowledge to be of lesser danger. I think those studies diluted the level of danger presented.

And can you imagine putting a surface in your mouth directly? Like a fork or a pacifier or a joint?

It could be, that the side being orders of magnitude off, is the CDC claim.

[greenjar_01]

6. Oooof

Embarrassing post, dude.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

7. That's not how statistics work.

Some people didn't take a stats class in college and it shows.

[Ocelot II]

9. I didn't take statistics in college and I still knew it was wrong.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

11. Sometimes it's staggering what people don't get about statistics.

[Whiskeytide]

42. Statistically, 4 in 7 people ...

... don’t understand statistics 73% of the time. And of those 4, only 50% understand that they don’t understand statistics twice as frequently as those that understand half of the equation one third of the time. Accordingly, 1/3 of 1/5 of the general population are twice as likely to use statistics to demonstrate a statistical fallacy. This is easily shown on a venn diagram.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

47. I know.

I have been studying Statistics for the last 3 years.
So, that conclusively puts me in that 1/3rd of 1/5th of the time, providing that we are speaking of the population and not just some random sample. If you zoom in on that Venn diagram of yours, you can actually see me waving. (waving)

[csziggy]

73. I failed a statistcs course in college and I knew it was wrong nt

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

10. You are right.

But isn't it because the odds stop counting after the person catches COVID?
And, it would be an average of 100 such days by a person without COVID yet, I do believe.

And, there are many indications, that the < 10,000 is an underestimate. As I pointed out with a couple of the points.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

66. I did a simulation of the situation.

I did a sample of 1,000.
The median person had COVID before day 67

The AVERAGE amount of days before a person caught COVID was 100, so about 3 months.

The luckiest person, of the 1,000 had COVID on before day 721

102 people of the 1,000, so more than 10%, had COVID by day number 10.93 (before day 11)

BTW, I believe they included surfaces that just had a person breath in the same room. Contamination by airborne particles.
I was simply trying to get the "feeling" of the risk presented to the readers. I hate that my miswording/misrepresentation caused the point to be taken less seriously.

[Hugin]

76. Actual numbers derived via simulation.

Good approach.

This is the best work I've seen anyone do on the topic.

[Pobeka]

8. *less than* 1 in 10,000

The first premise in your algebraic model is wrong.

If you check out references in 7,8.9 in the paper you reference, you might get a better idea.

Or, you could just wash your hands -- it's a good idea for all kinds of other microbes other than COVID, and makes the risk vanishingly small.

[Moostache]

12. The simple facts are the best to adhere to in this case...

This is good advice for avoiding any number of viruses and bacteria...

1) AVOID touching your face.

Especially the eyes and mouth.
That may seem simple, but try to catalog the number of times you touch your face in 15 minutes.
The result will surprise you and make clear just how often we touch our face in a day.

2) AVOID being inside someone's 'personal space'...socially distance from strangers and avoid crowds.

This is usually given as 6' of spherical separation from others, but in reality it could be a lot more if people are actively coughing or sneezing, or just exerting more than basal rates of exhalations.

3) WEAR a face covering mask during periods of community spread of airborne viral outbreaks.

This is not only very OLD knowledge, it is the only thing that puts a barrier between yourself and others that effectively cuts airborne viruses off from easy transmission in a population. The other measures are self-protective, but masking works by reducing the number of potential transmission targets via elimination of transmitters.

Masks are less effective at protecting people FROM virus than they are at limiting people SPREADING virus. That is what makes so many people frustrated at wearing masks - they think of them wrongly. They think it is a sign of weakness or capitulation - a mask as symbol of surrender. It is actually the exact opposite - a symbol of power over an invisible, microscopic enemy that doesn't give a single fuck who voted for who; or who is more "alpha" than others, or who is not going to lose "freedoms".

Stopping viral spread via masking works when EVERYONE participates - especially the asymptomatic carriers who never realize that they could have infected others, even though they themselves felt fine the entire time. This was true in every single respiratory virus in human history - and will remain that way forever. Viral vaccinations have come an incredible distance in speed and distribution over the last 30 years...but they will never be instantaneous.

Follow the recommendations for hand washing, facial contact, social distancing and mask wearing until the community spread is zero and the pandemic ends. Keep fucking around with fake bravado and imbecilic actions and this will linger and come at us in more waves. We can end this outbreak now, if we stop acting like small sacrifices are enormous burdens.

My fear is for the next outbreak. The one that is 80-90% fatal and 100% transmissible to anyone within 6 feet of an infected individual and has no vaccine. The wrong lessons are being taught and accepted on COVID-19. Too many people are going to say "yeah...whatever...." when the alarms are raised the next time. We have not gotten out of the woods on COVID-19 yet, but we are sowing seeds of destruction for the future all the same.

[oldsoftie]

49. Look at how successful Taiwan has been.

They also have a very robust contact tracing program. One that people here likely would NEVER go along with.

[spinbaby]

13. You should be washing your hands anyway

Just good practice to wash your hands with soap at every opportunity.

[Ms. Toad]

14. There are zero cases of infection confirmed to have occurred by fomite transmission.

There have been few reports of COVID-19 cases potentially attributed to fomite transmission

This is in sharp contrast to the well-documented transmission of COVID 19 by aerosolized and other airborne matter.

If your back-of-the-envelope calculations that you would get infected in 30 days is accurate, there would have been documented cases.

Yes, it makes sense to engage in good hand hygiene and to minimize contact with frequently touched surfaces. BUT mostly it makes sense because it reduces the risk of acquiring influenza, colds, and norovirus - all of which are much more easily transmitted by surface contact.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

17. Case reports indicate that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted between people by touching surfaces

Per the Article
Case reports indicate that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted between people by touching surfaces

And
Infections can often be attributed to multiple transmission pathways. Fomite transmission is difficult to prove definitively, in part because respiratory transmission from asymptomatic people cannot be ruled out

And
Hand hygiene..... .... has been associated with lower risk of infection

[Ms. Toad]

20. Find me a documented case.

What you are pointing to is theory, speculation, and correlation about the cause. There are zero documented cases that I am aware of. This is in sharp contrast to transmission via airborne virus - which is extremely well documented.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

28. No Proof

You can not conclusively document a case as airborne, due to the chance that a formite transmission had unknowingly occurred.

[Ms. Toad]

31. Not correct.

Airborne cases are well documented. Fomite transmission, to my knowledge, has never been documented.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

34. No, just well suspected. nt

[BannonsLiver]

15. Of course it's real

But when all is said and done the vast majority of infections will have come from respiratory droplets and airborne spread years from now when we have a full picture of the data. I wash my hands, use wipes and the like, but I am much more concerned about what’s in the air.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

16. Me Too

I am much more concerned about what’s in the air.

And a large reason is that I do not touch my face and I use alcohol on my dining objects. I use alcohol on my apples, etc.
I have been careful about touching my face for years. Trying to avoid autoimmune disease.
Everyone has turned into a me now! lol

I just don't want people to disregard the dangers of surface to face transmission.

[Treefrog]

18. You put alcohol on your apples?

Wowza. What does it mean to ‘use alcohol on your dining objects?’ You mean you put alcohol on knives and forks? Plates? Seriously?

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

19. Yes, Yes, And Yes, WowZa !!! nt

[Ms. Toad]

21. You cannot "avoid autoimmune disease."

Autoimmune disease is your body attacking itself. You don't get an autoimmune disease by touching your face.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

24. Viruses have been considered as major environmental factors that trigger the autoimmune phenomena

Searched for,
autoimmune disease caused by a virus

From the search result,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6723519/#:~:text=For%20a%20long%20time%2C%20viruses,and%20multiple%20sclerosis%20(MS).

Viruses have been considered as major environmental factors that trigger the autoimmune phenomena in genetically susceptible individuals

And this, mostly in the serp,
For a long time, viruses have been shown to modify the clinical picture of several autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes (T1D), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Sjögren’s syndrome (SS), herpetic stromal keratitis (HSK), celiac disease (CD), and multiple sclerosis (MS). Best examples of viral infections that have been proposed to modulate the induction and development of autoimmune diseases are the infections with enteric viruses such as

[Ms. Toad]

35. They are not caused by a virus.

Autoimmune disease are genetic. Only people who have the gene or combination of genes that predispose one to the disease can ever manifest the disease.

What triggers manifestation of the disease is a complex question that is not yet resolved is still largely in the stage of theory. Various environmental triggers have been proposed.

[ProfessorGAC]

46. As An MS Patient, I Agree

Viruses might trigger an immune response that a genetically predisposed person might find never turns off.
But, mechanisms to that effect are, at this point, conjectural.
I find it highly unlikely that a single viral exposure is the cause of my, admittedly mild, case of MS.

[Ms. Toad]

56. Similar experience with my daughter -

although not viral. She has IBD (an autoimmune disorder in which her body attacks her colon).

We're pretty sure in her case that extensive exposure to poultry triggered hers. She was eating chicken on an almost daily basis both before her symptoms started and for the first year after diagnosis. She also intermittently had hives - which we couldn't tie to anything specific. After diagnosis with IBD, with repeated unpredictable flares, when she was being tested for ragweed allergies, we had them use up the grid with things she ate frequently. She tested positive for chicken allergies. We removed it (and anything with wings) from her diet and she remained in remission for a decade - aside from three instances, each of which we could track back to someone who lied to us (twice deliberately, one accidentally) about the presence of chicken or turkey in something they fed her.

As near as we can tell (theory, still), the poultry triggered an immune response and - once triggered in response to the poultry passing through - her immune system just kept attacking her gut.

BUT - this was persistent exposure over a period of a couple of years - and her remission can only be maintained by medication + removal of poultry from her diet. Not a single exposure to an environmental trigger.

Glad your case of MS is mild. I'm connected to close to two dozen people with MS - some based on relationship (childhood church member, brother-in-law, 2 cousins, boss's wife) and others because I've particiated in the MS-150 rides for a number of years. The disease is so unpredictable. Still planning to do one more before I retire my bike from long-distance rides. Looks like this summer will be a one-day ride - rats. I was looking for a 2-day ride to finish on.

[ProfessorGAC]

57. Other Than Blindness In One Eye...

...I have had zero exacerbations since onset.
The experts believe that the interferon treatments changed the distribution of the various interferon's to the better.
I haven't even been on meds for over 8 years. Still no change.
The blind left eye was one of the onset symptoms. That and mild burning in my feet are all that happened to me. I'm 12 days short of 26 years since confirmed diagnosis!

[Ms. Toad]

59. It's such an unpredictable illness -

almost as much variation as COVID.

My brother-in-law has few to no symptoms. I think his diagnosis was an incidental diagnosis when they did an MRI looking for something else. He's on medications - but he's certainly not progressing. My church friend has been living with it and has required a wheelchair for mobility for close to 5 decades. She went from being a physically energetic mom of 4 kids to being unable to navigate the world without a wheelchair. But virtually no disease progress beyond the first few months after her diagnosis.

Glad you're doing so well!

[ProfessorGAC]

60. That It Is!

And, thanks for the well wishes.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

58. No question

I do not debate the cause of your condition.

As far as, unlikely that a single viral exposure is the cause, being the cause of anything , I do have something to say.

My understanding is that when your body builds soldiers against a virus the first time that virus is seen, those same soldiers can misidentify your own tissues as that virus. Therefore, it only takes that one encounter to set of an autoimmune response.

[Treefrog]

55. Thank you.

[ProfessorGAC]

23. Who Said Otherwise?

What's been said for nearly a year is that it's possible, but direct inhalation is a FAR higher risk factor.
Nobody said surface contact transmission could not occur. At least nobody here on DU.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

26. brooklynite & Ms. Toad. probably amongst many others

brooklynite
said, Chance of contracting COVID-19 from surfaces nearly zero: CDC

Ms. Toad
said, COVID 19 is not spread by silverware or hands.

[ProfessorGAC]

45. Nearly Zero?

That's what you've got? "Nearly zero" does NOT negate the existence of anything. It's a quantification of a risk factor.
Near zero, is not zero.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

50. I had more

I also had,
is not spread

[Yavin4]

27. If surface contact could be an effective transmission of COVID...

we would have seen far higher cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Exponentially higher.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

29. Deaths are staggering

Millions are dead.

[Yavin4]

32. There are have 2.87 million deaths worldwide.

if surface level transmissions were effective, we would have seen this number be in the tens millions at the very least.

[Hugin]

30. The raw statistics say somewhere around 5000 have contracted the COVID-19 virus...

and of those 55 Americans have probably died due to surface transmission.

I guess that's okay with some people. It's not okay with me, but, I'm not okay with mass shootings either.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

33. How did you come up with those numbers? nt

[Hugin]

39. The CDC itself says up-to 1 in 10000 COVID cases are caused by surface transmission.

Take the total number of cases in the US and divide by 10000. The same is true for the total deaths.

That's how ratios and probabilities work.

I guess there's people who are okay with a non-negative number of people contracting a virus from a surface. I'm not, because, I might be that person.

What I don't get is the virulent reactions of people who come unglued because people feel more comfortable cleaning their stuff off. It's none of their fucking business.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

40. Not Correct

The CDC said,
Each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 ( risk of infection)


Not that "1 in 10000 COVID cases are caused by surface transmission"

[Hugin]

41. Okay, work through it yourself. n/t

[Voltaire2]

69. Work through what?

You based a number on an incorrect interpretation of the cdc statement. There is nothing to rework, your claim is wrong.

[Hugin]

74. My point is the risk of surface transfer infection is non-zero.

Meaning out of numbers as large as 30 Million cases of COVID and 550,000 deaths there are sure to be a finite number of people who have contracted and died of the virus via surface transmission.

Misleading people by confusing rare with none is disingenuous.

"People can be infected with SARS-CoV-2 through contact with surfaces. However, based on available epidemiological data and studies of environmental transmission factors, surface transmission is not the main route by which SARS-CoV-2 spreads, and the risk is considered to be low. The principal mode by which people are infected with SARS-CoV-2 is through exposure to respiratory droplets carrying infectious virus. In most situations, cleaning surfaces using soap or detergent, and not disinfecting, is enough to reduce risk. Disinfection is recommended in indoor community settings where there has been a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19 within the last 24 hours. The risk of fomite transmission can be reduced by wearing masks consistently and correctly, practicing hand hygiene, cleaning, and taking other measures to maintain healthy facilities.

From: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html

- People can be infected through surface contact.
- "considered" is a weak word based on subjective factors. How low? If the US had been keeping up with it's testing we might know exactly how low. We don't. So any number is as good as any other. We can't even tell if reinfection is occurring and at what rate.
- In any public setting where over 150 people have moved through an area in a 24 hour period, it's a solid probability there is a 'suspected' (not to mention a 'confirmed') case of COVID-19 among them. So, cleaning is still recommended. (AS PER THE CDC)

I will point out again... COVID-19 is not the only disease out there. My goal is less than one infection. Some people are okay with more as long as it isn't them.

[lpbk2713]

36. I've been wondering if pay phones are still around.

That would be a sure fire way to spread Covid.

Or anything else.

[beaglelover]

38. Just wash and sanitize your hands frequently throughout the day.

[ecstatic]

44. Yeah, I don't think the CDC should reverse course on this

As a germaphobe, I like the "deep disinfection" culture we're now in. Better safe than sorry, one would think. Especially when you think about the variants that are popping up.

[oldsoftie]

52. But we have to be careful that we dont end up with more resistant bugs because of it.

I remember before the first football game at Jacksonville stadium. TV showed workers walking around fogging everything in sight. No one had been in the stadium in months. There wasnt any Covid anywhere in that stadium. It was pointless. Just like taking antibiotics for minor illnesses, over-sanitizing can & probably will come back to bite us.

[ecstatic]

78. Good point. Oh well. I doubt these places are really cleaning the way

they claim to be. For example, I was on a plane a couple weeks ago. Delta Airlines--I paid a lot more for the ticket based on their promises of cleaning, middle seat open, etc.

Watched the plane arrive with passengers who unloaded. Within 10 or 15 minutes, the next set of passengers was already loading. There's no way to deep clean that quickly. Smh.

[oldsoftie]

82. I've flown Delta about 6 times since all this started.

But supposedly they walk thru with that big fogger and it only takes 10 mins. Of course WE cant see that from the terminal!
But the ventilation is the biggest thing; airlines have GREAT ventilation systems with downward airflow. And since masks, no major spread of any size has been tied to an airline flight.

[USALiberal]

53. Parody?? Nt

[Voltaire2]

67. Your assumptions are wrong.

You are assuming that contaminated surfaces are common. They aren’t. The virus does not survive long. Contaminated surfaces outside of clinical situations- a covid ward for example - are rare.

So you first have to determine the probability of contact with a contaminated surface, then apply the probability of infection from that contact.

For example, if the probability of any random surface being contaminated is 1 in 1,000,000, which seems reasonable to me, the chance you will get covid from touching a random surface is 1 in 100,000,000,000.

Pick a higher probability of surface contamination: 1:10,000, you still have essentially zero chance of getting covid from surfaces.

“ Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection 7, 8, 9. ”
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html

[Kaleva]

68. The probability of an infection each time you touch a contaminated surface is less then 1/10,000

That's the way I understand it.

It's like the chances of a coin turning up heads each time you flip it. It's always 50/50 each time.

[Ocelot II]

75. Yes, and the probability isn't cumulative.

It's kind of, but not exactly, like the odds of getting snake eyes when you roll a pair of dice, which is 1/36, and if you roll snake eyes your probability of rolling snake eyes on any roll is still 1/36 (2.77%); the fact that you just did it is totally irrelevant to future outcomes. But the probability of rolling snake eyes twice in a row is (1/36) x (1/36) which is 1/1296 (about .07%). The odds of rolling snake eyes is easily determined to be 1/36 because all of the possibilities are known - two dice with six sides each will always give you exactly 1/36 odds. The probability of doing it twice in a row is much lower, though, because you figure probabilities by multiplying the odds of a single result by the number of attempts. But the analysis isn't whether you'll get covid once by touching a surface and then get it a second time by touching another surface (the odds would be 1/10,000 x 1/10,000, which is vanishingly small), so it's not really like rolling dice. What we want to know is whether your odds of getting covid increase on the basis of how many surfaces you touch, and specifically whether that probability can be determined mathematically. If you keep touching public surfaces and never washing your hands you might increase your very small odds of getting the virus over time, but the odds will not increase predictably in accordance with the number of surfaces you touch. That's because the CDC says only that the probability is less than 1/10,000. It could be 1/100,000, 1/1,000,000, or even zero. It all depends on the surface, the amount of time the virus has been there, whether it's been exposed to sunlight, and many other factors. So it's simply impossible to conclude that if you touch many surfaces your odds of infection increase in accordance with the exact number of surfaces you touched.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

79. Simulation

I'm almost sure they didn't mean the HIGHEST risk was less than 10,000

It all depends on the surface (...etc etc.)

So, imagine a sick person sucked on a pacifier and then you stuck it in your mouth.
The odds might be nearly 1 in 1. Way higher than 1 in 10,000.

I do believe the odds were an averaged risk and that it would be close to the 1 in 10,000. If it were an average of 1 in 100,000 they probably would have said so.

You make a great point: if you have a 1 in 4 chance and a 1 in 8 chance and then a 1 in 2 chance, can you really just create an average that can be used across the board for the simulation/statistical model.

[Ocelot II]

83. Covid is a respiratory disease.

Some minimum load of the virus would have to get into your respiratory system, so licking or swallowing a contaminated item won't necessarily make you sick. That's why the odds of getting it from surfaces are so small. Hypothetically, if you touched a contaminated surface and picked up a sufficient viral load on your fingers and then touched your face in such a way that you would inhale viruses, you could get sick. But if you really want to get the virus, the best way to do it is to enclose yourself, unmasked, in a small, poorly-ventilated room with a lot of other people who are not wearing masks. While I do wash my hands after I've been out in public, I am much more concerned about being too close to other people. Viruses like the norovirus, which is a gastrointestinal disease, are easily transmitted through food and contaminated surfaces, but covid, not so much.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

84. Covid is a MOUTH disease. (also)

Some minimum load of the virus would have to get into your respiratory system

They have found that this is not the case.
____________________________

Study shows how SARS-CoV-2 infects cells in mouth, possibly leading to oral symptoms
Mouth may transmit virus to lungs, digestive system
March 25, 2021

our study shows that the mouth is a route of infection as well as an incubator for the SARS-CoV-2

https://www.ada.org/en/publications/ada-news/2021-archive/march/study-shows-how-sars-cov-2-infects-cells-in-mouth-possibly-leading-to-oral-symptoms

___________________________________


The potential of the virus to infect multiple areas of the body might help explain the wide-ranging symptoms experienced by COVID-19 patients, including oral symptoms such as taste loss, dry mouth and blistering. Moreover, the findings point to the possibility that the mouth plays a role in transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to the lungs

This comes from a GOV website and speaks of the ADA findings
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/scientists-find-evidence-novel-coronavirus-infects-mouths-cells
___________________________________________


In the new study, posted Oct. 27 to the preprint database medRxiv, researchers predicted which mouth tissues might be most vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2

"This research mightily underscores the importance of the public health measures we know are effective — masks, social distancing and handwashing — whether you have symptoms or not," Byrd said. In terms of how oral infection fits into the big picture of COVID-19, "there is much to learn about where SARS-CoV-2 begins, travels within our bodies and finally is cleared," he said.

This is, I believe, the same researchers as above, but shows an earlier awareness.


https://www.livescience.com/oral-infection-coronavirus-spread.html

[Demsrule86]

71. I wash my hands of course. Learned that in Kindergarten. But consider the flu...regular flu

is way down I am certain that is because of masks...people are always touching their faces I see that and yet the flu is down. I will wear a mask next flu season.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

81. COVID is Highly Contagious

the flu is down.

That worries me. It highlights how scary the contagion level of COVID is. We are being so careful that we are stopping Flu in it's tracks, and yet COVID continues to flourish.

[Demsrule86]

90. I believe that is because many in our country won't follow the basic safety requirments...wear a

mask, social distance etc.

[Sympthsical]

72. Uh, that is not at all how statistics work, but ok

And where ya'll being so filthy, touching everything all day?

Basic hygiene negates most of this.

[USALiberal]

80. This didn't go well for you. nt

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

85. It is not over yet. nt

[Wounded Bear]

89. Never got behind the whole surface fetish...

never sprayed/washed/rinsed/wiped all my groceries or anything like that.

Having said that, I do wash my hands more than I did pre-covid. It just makes good sense and is sensible hygiene.