Read on Twitter
An important point! The conclusion that surfaces aren’t relevant for transmission puts a lot of faith in missing data & potential confounding
we are not identifying the source of all (or even most!) infections, it’s easier to trace an individual as a source than a surface
1/4 https://twitter.com/EpiEllie/status/1282096734521434112
we are not identifying the source of all (or even most!) infections, it’s easier to trace an individual as a source than a surface1/4 https://twitter.com/EpiEllie/status/1282096734521434112
If the idea that surfaces are not a common mode of transmission is based on the infections that we *know* the source of, we assume the ones we *don’t know* are missing at random - a big assumption
2/4
2/4
as @epiellie mentioned, lots of initial messaging was around infection control related to surfaces: wiping down high touch areas, lots of hand washing, etc. This will *confound* the relationship between what we are seeing and the true nature of the modes of transmission3/4
What does this mean?
There is a chance surfaces *do* matter, but it's hard to capture that via tracing
There is a chance that surfaces *do* matter, we think they don't is because everyone did such a good job with this form of infection control
this is positive!
4/4
There is a chance surfaces *do* matter, but it's hard to capture that via tracing
There is a chance that surfaces *do* matter, we think they don't is because everyone did such a good job with this form of infection control
this is positive!4/4
