Toilets spew invisible aerosol plumes with every flush
theconversation.com
theconversation.com
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abd9149
"Airborne transmission of respiratory viruses" (2021) Science
> "Advances in aerosol measurement techniques, such as aerodynamic and scanning mobility particle sizing, have shown that the majority of exhaled aerosols are smaller than 5 μm, and a large fraction are <1 μm for most respiratory activities, including those produced during breathing, talking, and coughing."
Such droplets can likely pass through cloth masks with little difficulty, and 6 feet of distance is probably irrelevant. The only thing that prevents transmission and infection between nearby people is containment efforts such as BSL-3/4 laboratory precautions and even there, accidental transmission has been documented.
Without highly strict quarantine and isolation protocols, we're really all just swimming in the same petri dish when it comes to respiratory transmission.
Which (for me) brings up this never-asked question. You hear about the cattle methane ... but how much CO2 do 8 billion people breathe out in a year?
you missed a great deal of opportunity telling people they are wrong
People breathe out CO2 that is product of their own metabolism.
Oxygen + carbohydrates in, CO2 out.
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/do-we-exhale-carbon
It calculates that "a population of 7 billion people, breathing away for 365.25 days per year, and you get an annual CO2 output of 2.94 billion tons." It then points out that " human respiration is part of a “closed loop cycle” in which our carbon dioxide output is matched by the carbon dioxide taken in by the wheat, corn, celery, and Ugli fruit that we eat." Except, of course, for weight we add to our bodies.
Of course that doesn't stop each of us from combusting 5 tons of CO2 each year.
Urine streams aerosolize bacteria present in the toilet; sitting understandably causes more exposure than standing. A custom foam covering the interior surfaces is effective at negating the splash effect (though it presumably needs reapplication after a flush). https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s1375...
A recent literature review https://ami-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jam...
This mentions a paper by Yahya 1992 https://www.jstor.org/stable/44535384 which examines use of surfactants (soaps) in flush water, and finds them to be effective. Seems to be more useful than disinfectants like chlorine.
I always assumed this is why the lid on the toilets exists.
I have seen many arguing about leaving the toilet seat up and down but I always felt the only real answer is to put the whole lid down.
Even if you’re not flushing the water still evaporates and brings some tiny particles with it.
From what I gather practices vary, some squirt the bleach into the bowl after flushing and some beforehand.
Question: whilst neither practice would stop the aerosols from forming what would the likely effect of the hypochlorite be on bacterial/viral load in said aerosols if squirted in before flushing?
Hypochlorite is a highly efficient disinfectant so presumably its effectiveness in this situation would depend on its concentration and the degree of its mixing.
Has any study of this kind been undertaken? (With the large number of bathroom bleach products on the market surely someone has done such a study.)
> One of the worst places to use your phone is in the bathroom, Martin and Whittier both agree. When toilets flush, they spread germs everywhere, which is how phones end up with fecal bacteria like E. coli. “Taking a cell phone into the bathroom and then leaving with it is kind of like going in, not washing your hands and then coming back out," Martin says. "It’s the same level of concern."
A round trip plane ride for each toilet break seems expensive and time consuming!