Another example of a stupid ass news headline. "COVID-19 exposure on flights is more common than you think." 2019-nCoV is what you're exposed to and COVID-19 is what you get as a result. And if you're in a fucking tube with 100-300 people I would think it would be extremely common.
@georgem In the UK, the number of confirmed cases in the last week amounts to about 0.5% of the population. Let's say 1% are contagious at any given time. Now most of those are probably not flying anywhere, especially with negative tests required for travel in many places. That means there's maybe one contagious person on a full plane. If the plane isn't full, and few are, there's not even that many. I really don't think exposure on planes is "extremely common."
@mansr having a negative test would certainly help but unless those numbers you are citing are the actual number of people infected and not just the number tested that's rather meaningless.
@mansr I would wager that people who travel on a regular basis have a much higher rate of infection than the general population.
@georgem Maybe they get infected at a higher rate, but do they travel while contagious any more than others?
@mansr well... Good numbers are hard to come by but it sounds like people can be contagious up to 72 before showing symptoms and some people seem to be contagious and never show symptoms. So I imagine people who travel often do pose more of a risk to other travelers. Anyway, I'll just stay home.
@georgem I'm going off the number who have tested positive during a span of 7 days. Everybody who wants a test can get one, but some cases will still be missed, so I doubled the number.
A nice little Mastodon instance. Mild trolling encouraged (keep it local), but not required. Malicious behaviour is not tolerated. Follow Wheaton's law and you'll be fine.