Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

IrishAfricanAmerican

(4,430 posts)

7. Wonderful, more fuel for the lunatic's conspiracy theories!

Reply to SheltieLover (Original post)

Fri Apr 23, 2021, 01:18 PM

Apr 2021

I'm sure the Russian troll farms will be right on this.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

MIT researchers say you're no safer from Covid indoors at 6 feet or 60 feet in new study challenging [View all] SheltieLover Apr 2021 OP

Chemical engineering, and applied mathematics gratuitous Apr 2021 #1

Actually, Many Chem Es... ProfessorGAC Apr 2021 #2

actually both of those fields would be fairly well versed in how air flows which appears to be what dsc Apr 2021 #3

These people have more expertise on how fluids and droplets move than medical people caraher Apr 2021 #22

"Fauci is such an idiot, he should have used the Bazant & Bush risk calculator" dalton99a Apr 2021 #4

Thank you for making it easier to understand. marie999 Apr 2021 #21

What I don't see is... TheRealNorth Apr 2021 #5

Yes, it does sound fishy. ananda Apr 2021 #20

Never bought 6ft. A Korean researcher early on in the pandemic JCMach1 Apr 2021 #34

How about some actual experiments? Did they do those, or just theorize? soothsayer Apr 2021 #6

Wonderful, more fuel for the lunatic's conspiracy theories! IrishAfricanAmerican Apr 2021 #7

How about 6 feet versus 1 or 2 feet? Since that's the ACTUAL POINT of the 6ft rule Hugh_Lebowski Apr 2021 #8

I think the 6' rule comes from droplet precautions elias7 Apr 2021 #11

Okay but ... Hugh_Lebowski Apr 2021 #15

Meh Sgent Apr 2021 #26

Has anyone ever seen the aerosol results of a sneeze? Of had a person sneeze in an about joetheman Apr 2021 #9

If is was 60 feet spacing that was needed then wouldn't everyone be sick now? SWBTATTReg Apr 2021 #10

Well then I'm staying at least 60 feet from everyone at MIT underpants Apr 2021 #12

I quickly reviewed the actual paper (not the cnbc unscientific analysis). Pobeka Apr 2021 #13

Yes, it's a model caraher Apr 2021 #23

Another Thing That Bugged Me ProfessorGAC Apr 2021 #28

Yep, when I think about the reality of air flows in a room. Pobeka Apr 2021 #29

I've Been Involved In Several... ProfessorGAC Apr 2021 #32

I wondered about that, too. myccrider Apr 2021 #35

See my post #30. n/t Pobeka Apr 2021 #31

After skimming the article.... TheRealNorth Apr 2021 #14

If it's a poor reading I expect the authors to raise hell and demand it's taken down Hugh_Lebowski Apr 2021 #16

Makes sense in a closed circulation environment. roamer65 Apr 2021 #17

Even Dumpy knew. He just didn't share. Kid Berwyn Apr 2021 #18

I was glad to see the 6 ft indoors recommendation and hoped it would be okay, but I wasn't brewens Apr 2021 #19

I'd tend to trust epidemiologists and immunologists more than chemical engineers harumph Apr 2021 #24

concentration in the turbulent jet at a distance of 6 ft is 30 times higher DontBelieveEastisEas Apr 2021 #25

Distance should tend to dilute the airborne cloud; drying should make the particles less infectious Klaralven Apr 2021 #27

ANALYSIS IS FOR MASKED PEOPLE: From the author's appendix, some critical info not in the cnbc piece: Pobeka Apr 2021 #30

This is not believable to me Meowmee Apr 2021 #33