Originally Posted by
downhillmaster
It is most certainly not the best data available at this point. It is simply a theory with 0 testing.
There is not even one viral specialist involved in the study 🙄
It has in fact already been mostly debunked by recognized viral specialists.
The only reason it ever made the rounds is that it appeals to scared sheep.
Ok, let’s see your data, and we’ll analyze. Throwing out conclusions, with no data or analysis, doesn’t add much to the discussion.
And on the subject of missing points, I fully understand my link was simply about fluid dynamics and how particles move in the air, not done by epidemiologists.
It’s A piece of the puzzle. It establishes that there is good reason to believe you would get a significant viral load in that circumstance. Whether in actuality that is going to lead to infection, we need more data. It’s not like it’s a real high priority right now to do blinded, randomized,controlled studies on pace lines. so you work with the data you have, and you make reasoned risk balancing decisions based on the information available.
Nothing about this is black and white. To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, with Covid 19, there are few known knowns, many known unknowns, and even more unknown unknowns. In other words, we don’t even know what what we don’t know.
So some reasoned risk balancing, with a dose of caution seems to be highly in order. Particularly when the subject is group rides, where the marginal cost of delaying group rides is pretty darn small, and the cost, if you turn out to be wrong catastrophic.