A new COVID-19 study reveals that social distancing that follows the "6-foot-rule" does not assure your protection from acquiring the virus. The said rule says that your distance from a person should be at least 6 or 60 feet away to guarantee that you are safe.
Social Distancing and COVID-19
Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) found out that the "6-foot-rule" cast some doubt about its effectiveness when it comes to COVID-19 protection.
In a previous interview with CNBC, Martin Bazant, the MIT engineering professor said that social distancing is not helping an individual with so much impact.
This also gives a "false sense of security" to the people because they know that they will be safe if they are at 6 or 60 feet indoors.
Bazant added that every person shared the same level of risk regardless of the distance.
The study entitled "A guideline to limit indoor airborne transmission of COVID-19" was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) of the United States of America.
Inside it, the researchers have measured the exposure risk of a person to COVID-19. They considered factors like air circulation, air infiltration, and how long a person spends indoors.
Moreover, they also noted other factors such as respiratory activities like speaking, breathing, and eating, as well as mask use and immunization.
What the Study Found Out
The group discovered that social distancing has lesser importance than the amount of time spent inside. Furthermore, the researchers note that this is a significant finding that the Word Health Organization and the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention have missed, New York Post reported.
Bazant pointed out that the air that a person is breathing rises and spreads around a room. That instance makes the exposure to the virus higher.
"What our analysis continues to show is that many spaces that have been shut down in fact don't need to be. Oftentimes the space is large enough, the ventilation is good enough, the amount of time people spend together is such that those spaces can be safely operated even at full capacity and the scientific support for reduced capacity in those spaces is really not very good, Bazant added.
Moving forward, he called the 6-foot rule in social distancing "unreasonable." He said that what they need is scientific information that is based on thorough analysis and should not scare the public.
In its simplest form, the researchers wanted to point out that social distancing guidelines are overlooked at the very start since the huge health organizations did not justify it further.
While we know social distancing, we are only informed that when a person sneezes or coughs, he/she could likely infect the nearby individual through the droplets.
Bazant stated that the study did not mention the safety difference which is concerned about the zero and six feet distance.
This article is owned by Tech Times
Written by Joseph Henry