Is it time to revise our two-metre social distancing guidelines? One Covid-19 expert thinks it is.
Joel Rindelaub, a research fellow at Auckland University's School of Chemical Sciences, this morning told Breakfast that the two-metre advice is based on old data.
It comes after three reports into cases of Covid-19 transmission within two Auckland managed isolation facilities last year were released by the Ministry of Health yesterday.
The review found airborne transmission was the most plausible cause of the virus passing between guests, including one instance where it's believed ventilation at the facility allowed transmission from one returnee to another on a different floor.
"We can only try to limit the risks the best we can. That's why we have contact tracing, that's why we wear masks, and that's why we do this thing called social distancing to try to minimise the chance of transmission.
"Clearly, I would not feel safe at two metres, especially where these aerosol transmission events can happen, you know, tens of metres in a room if there isn't proper ventilation."
Rindelaub said microscopic droplets can remain in the air for hours.
To paint a shocking, and rather disturbing, picture of what that means for two people talking to each other up close, he told Breakfast host Indira Stewart, "Right now we're probably exchanging little tiny droplets. We're spitting in each others mouth — it's pretty gross.
"The recommendation of two metres [social distancing] is actually based on old data and it might be something we need to revise," he added.
"We just need to better convey that two metres doesn't mean that you're safe, and in fact in some places like inside work areas they say, 'Oh, you need to keep one metre distance,' but the thing is it should be the opposite.
"Indoors is where we need to keep extra distance between people because that's where it's more likely to have these aerosol transmission events."
SHARE ME