Risk of contracting virus on airplanes - perspective
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Denial that the situation was traumatising also for those who didn't fall seriously ill and didn't lose loved ones doesn't help either. Just think about it:
You live a normal life. The next day, you are suddenly stripped off most of the things which you have been taking for granted ever since. Freedom of movement. Freedom of meeting whoever you like. Freedom of exercising most of the activities you enjoy. You hardly have any clue what's going to happen tomorrow. You can't plan anything - and whatever you have already planned has been scrapped. You are constantly swamped with incoherent and scary info. Your job is on the line. Many around you are scared to death, falling into panic attacks, insomnia and whatnot. The list goes on and on.
It's only human that after something like that many people have lasting trauma which, sadly, will take some time to heal. They are not "snowflakes", they are not weak. The vast majority of them will recover completely within months and will learn something useful from the experience, coming out of it as even better people. But, for sure, the mental health impact of everything that happened shall not be disregarded. Remember the WHO definition of health? "A state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, not limited to a lack of illness or infirmity." Hence, how healthy are people whose mental and social well-being are at the bottom of the waste bin? And there's nothing shameful about that.
You live a normal life. The next day, you are suddenly stripped off most of the things which you have been taking for granted ever since. Freedom of movement. Freedom of meeting whoever you like. Freedom of exercising most of the activities you enjoy. You hardly have any clue what's going to happen tomorrow. You can't plan anything - and whatever you have already planned has been scrapped. You are constantly swamped with incoherent and scary info. Your job is on the line. Many around you are scared to death, falling into panic attacks, insomnia and whatnot. The list goes on and on.
It's only human that after something like that many people have lasting trauma which, sadly, will take some time to heal. They are not "snowflakes", they are not weak. The vast majority of them will recover completely within months and will learn something useful from the experience, coming out of it as even better people. But, for sure, the mental health impact of everything that happened shall not be disregarded. Remember the WHO definition of health? "A state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, not limited to a lack of illness or infirmity." Hence, how healthy are people whose mental and social well-being are at the bottom of the waste bin? And there's nothing shameful about that.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Emotional and psychological trauma is the result of extraordinarily stressful events that shatter your sense of security, making you feel helpless in a dangerous world. Psychological trauma can leave you struggling with upsetting emotions, memories, and anxiety that won’t go away." -- HelpGuide.
Saying that people who have suffered that over the past few months were not traumatised is not helpful, to them.
Saying that people who have suffered that over the past few months were not traumatised is not helpful, to them.
I am sorry to disappoint some but PTSD is a defined mental health condition with defined symptoms. Not wanting to fly due to the risk of catching a potentially fatal disease is not one of them. Personally I find it a bit offensive to be labelled with PTSD simply because I have a defined risk level I am not willing to exceed to go and lie on a beach in the summer.
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dubai, once... now London
Age: 49
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally agree with both PilotLZ and DaveReidUK points of view ;
It is very likely that a large amount of people could be clinically affected by some sort of raised level of stress due to the pandemic whilst another large amount would not clinically be diagnosed with PTSD but possibly some non clinical mild anxiety induced by that situation leading to very prudent decisions and avoidance of unnecessary threats (to keep it in our language).
It is very likely that a large amount of people could be clinically affected by some sort of raised level of stress due to the pandemic whilst another large amount would not clinically be diagnosed with PTSD but possibly some non clinical mild anxiety induced by that situation leading to very prudent decisions and avoidance of unnecessary threats (to keep it in our language).
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some context is needed with all of this.
Right now in Iceland, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ireland, Britain, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Poland, Czechia, Hungary, Switzerland and Austria there are a total of 613 'Severe/Critical' cases (nearly half in Germany!) out of a total population of 295 million.
For your 'holiday destinations', France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Croatia and Greece there are a total of 1176 'Severe/Critical' cases out of a total population of 197 million.
Those figures are very low. However, people are badly shaken up from everything that was going very, very badly all around them in April (where the rolling average of deaths in Britain alone was around 950 per day). For many, many, many that was stressful and traumatic. They need to recover from that. Being told the good news of how things have improved is needed rather than constant negative stories. People need to be convinced to shop again, people need to be convinced to fly again. Getting back to normal again as soon as possible is the best thing for everyone's minds.
What has been said above is not that one is being labelled as having PTSD 'because one doesn't want to fly', but rather that PTSD is having a huge influence on people not wanting to fly, shop, eat out, etc., etc.
Radgirl, if your location is correct then
a) I'm 'jealous'!
b) The total number of cases that you had around you was less than the total number of deaths in Britain in two days at the height of the problem -- that does affect peoples' minds; and quite understandably.
Right now in Iceland, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ireland, Britain, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Poland, Czechia, Hungary, Switzerland and Austria there are a total of 613 'Severe/Critical' cases (nearly half in Germany!) out of a total population of 295 million.
For your 'holiday destinations', France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Croatia and Greece there are a total of 1176 'Severe/Critical' cases out of a total population of 197 million.
Those figures are very low. However, people are badly shaken up from everything that was going very, very badly all around them in April (where the rolling average of deaths in Britain alone was around 950 per day). For many, many, many that was stressful and traumatic. They need to recover from that. Being told the good news of how things have improved is needed rather than constant negative stories. People need to be convinced to shop again, people need to be convinced to fly again. Getting back to normal again as soon as possible is the best thing for everyone's minds.
What has been said above is not that one is being labelled as having PTSD 'because one doesn't want to fly', but rather that PTSD is having a huge influence on people not wanting to fly, shop, eat out, etc., etc.
Radgirl, if your location is correct then
a) I'm 'jealous'!
b) The total number of cases that you had around you was less than the total number of deaths in Britain in two days at the height of the problem -- that does affect peoples' minds; and quite understandably.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: europe
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the number of people in intensive care is not that relevant when it comes to the safety of flying from the perspective of catching the disease in a plane.
the number of infectious people however is.
the number of infectious people however is.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Where the Money Takes Me
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok so the UK Government is reintroducing quarantine from tonight on all arrivals from Spain.
.....panic? Who said anything about panic?
Dear oh dear this industry is going to die at this rate.
.....panic? Who said anything about panic?
Dear oh dear this industry is going to die at this rate.
Think this is an optimal situation, would be better shown as a 3x3 config on an A320/737, where the passenger is sitting within a few inches of the two adjoining seatmates for hours on end.
Imho it is useless for the industry to claim that it is perfectly adequate already, they are a global business and need to meet globally acceptable standards. The obvious way forward is to help specify those global standards.
That is actually a serious issue well deserving of the industry's time, because there is reasonable evidence that the virus can spread airborne well over 20 feet, passing through the normal AC filtration.
Imho it is useless for the industry to claim that it is perfectly adequate already, they are a global business and need to meet globally acceptable standards. The obvious way forward is to help specify those global standards.
That is actually a serious issue well deserving of the industry's time, because there is reasonable evidence that the virus can spread airborne well over 20 feet, passing through the normal AC filtration.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wintermute
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DaveReidUK
Bravo ;-)
Update on next 6 months contracts :-
Zero provision for air travel (any travel actually). Not a sausage. Mandatory restrictions on any travel at the behest of multiple customers, i.e. even if you are prepared to travel to us, we're not having you on site so forget it (we're not prepared to travel, we have the internet, it's faster, cheaper and good enough).
Facts.
Prudent is a good word for it.
The neanderthals will continue to fly, get infected, breach quarantine, cause travel bans, let's see how that pans out as a revenue source.
I wish you well . . . it genuinely is absolutely fantastic not having to be up at 0400 to pointlessly travel to somewhere for a meeting, then to get home at 2300 . . . nobody will want to go back to that hellish existence . . . nobody . . .
Bravo ;-)
Update on next 6 months contracts :-
Zero provision for air travel (any travel actually). Not a sausage. Mandatory restrictions on any travel at the behest of multiple customers, i.e. even if you are prepared to travel to us, we're not having you on site so forget it (we're not prepared to travel, we have the internet, it's faster, cheaper and good enough).
Facts.
Prudent is a good word for it.
The neanderthals will continue to fly, get infected, breach quarantine, cause travel bans, let's see how that pans out as a revenue source.
I wish you well . . . it genuinely is absolutely fantastic not having to be up at 0400 to pointlessly travel to somewhere for a meeting, then to get home at 2300 . . . nobody will want to go back to that hellish existence . . . nobody . . .
The flow is obviously towards the sidewalls, else the A/C would gag on all the spillage that is the norm for aviation catering.
Imho, the key aspect here is the flow time of the filtered air. If the air is exchanged every 90 seconds and the cabin is 13 feet in diameter, the flow rate is only about 1 foot every 7 seconds.
Add to this disturbances from the proximate passengers, traffic down the aisles and perhaps even sneezes, there is ample time to get a full dose of the virus if one comes in the vicinity of an infected passenger.
There is a separate thread here about multiple transmissions on a TUI flight, so I think it is beating a dead horse to claim that somehow there is not a problem when it has been demonstrated in real life.
Imho, the key aspect here is the flow time of the filtered air. If the air is exchanged every 90 seconds and the cabin is 13 feet in diameter, the flow rate is only about 1 foot every 7 seconds.
Add to this disturbances from the proximate passengers, traffic down the aisles and perhaps even sneezes, there is ample time to get a full dose of the virus if one comes in the vicinity of an infected passenger.
There is a separate thread here about multiple transmissions on a TUI flight, so I think it is beating a dead horse to claim that somehow there is not a problem when it has been demonstrated in real life.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In actual fact, a number of flights have been identified as having virus positive passengers onboard but few if any have shown that any of the other passengers contacted the virus because of being exposed to someone who was positive. I see that Canadian Airlines will provide information that will show if the exposure resulted in infection or not. https://globalnews.ca/news/7329761/c...ntact-tracing/
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A recent study (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....02.20143826v3) found that the risk of infection on a flight is 1 in 4,300 for a full flight (becoming 1 in 7,700 if the middle seats are kept empty).
Also, Australia has been using contact tracing on flights (https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infect...x#nsw-domestic) and has found that while infected people have travelled on aeroplanes, nobody has been infected on aeroplanes.
Also, Australia has been using contact tracing on flights (https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infect...x#nsw-domestic) and has found that while infected people have travelled on aeroplanes, nobody has been infected on aeroplanes.
Discussed a week or so ago in the TUI Zante thread.
It's worth reading the whole paper, for anyone who hasn't - it's not that long.
Those calculated probabilities are based on a 2-hour US domestic flight, and factor in the probability that there is one or more infected passenger(s) on the flight. They also assume that all passengers (whether infected or not) are wearing masks.
It's a useful study, but it won't necessarily apply (a) in other parts of the world where the infection rate is higher/lower, and/or (b) to a longer- or shorter-duration flight.
It's worth reading the whole paper, for anyone who hasn't - it's not that long.
Those calculated probabilities are based on a 2-hour US domestic flight, and factor in the probability that there is one or more infected passenger(s) on the flight. They also assume that all passengers (whether infected or not) are wearing masks.
It's a useful study, but it won't necessarily apply (a) in other parts of the world where the infection rate is higher/lower, and/or (b) to a longer- or shorter-duration flight.
In the UK it would help the industry a lot if the leaders of the airlines and airports explained the risk of contracting covid 19 on a flight. But WW and MOL strut about like stroppy toddlers. And the Boss at Aberdeen and Glasgow saying the Governments were treating the aviation industry like they treated the miners in the 80s!
Meanwhile Lord Webber (as a luvvie in chief) gets lots of airtime stating he has still not had a satisfactory answer as to why you can fly but not to to one of his sweaty airless Victorian theatres, with raked low backed seating stacked in 4 floors with people singing along. This backed up by Paul Whitehouse in full Only Fools set saying something similar in that you can open a window in a theatre but not on a plane.
A concerted info campaign would help the industry no end, together with a 7 day quarantine period with s test at each end.
Meanwhile Lord Webber (as a luvvie in chief) gets lots of airtime stating he has still not had a satisfactory answer as to why you can fly but not to to one of his sweaty airless Victorian theatres, with raked low backed seating stacked in 4 floors with people singing along. This backed up by Paul Whitehouse in full Only Fools set saying something similar in that you can open a window in a theatre but not on a plane.
A concerted info campaign would help the industry no end, together with a 7 day quarantine period with s test at each end.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a news site, a scientific paper. 25 pages on -
" This investigation evaluated the performance of three ventilation systems in terms of SARS infection risk by air and thermal comfort in a single aisle commercial airliner and a twin-aisle airliner"
"The transmission of airborne infectious diseases, including influenza1, tuberculosis2 , and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)3, has been observed in commercial airliners."
https://engineering.purdue.edu/~yanc...per/2019-9.pdf
" This investigation evaluated the performance of three ventilation systems in terms of SARS infection risk by air and thermal comfort in a single aisle commercial airliner and a twin-aisle airliner"
"The transmission of airborne infectious diseases, including influenza1, tuberculosis2 , and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)3, has been observed in commercial airliners."
https://engineering.purdue.edu/~yanc...per/2019-9.pdf
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This study sites SARS from 2003. To date, there has not been one documented case of a transmission of SARS COV 2 on an airline flight. Doesn’t mean it couldn’t or hasn’t happened, it just hasn’t been a major contributor to this pandemic.
However Air travel allowed the disease to spread as China was way late to the party, as usual, and allowed 100’s of thousands of citizens to travel globally when a novel virus was circulating amongst its population in Hubei province. Seeding the entire world. Let’s not forget how this all could have been dramatically curtailed if the CCP wasn’t trying to hide and save face.
Now that the disease has spread globally, the true risks lie in the behaviours before and after the flight, not the flight. If we had efficient, reliable quick testing at airports, suddenly things change quite dramatically.
If the aviation industry collapses, the world economy is in a shyte load of trouble more than what it us now. Not going to happen.....
However Air travel allowed the disease to spread as China was way late to the party, as usual, and allowed 100’s of thousands of citizens to travel globally when a novel virus was circulating amongst its population in Hubei province. Seeding the entire world. Let’s not forget how this all could have been dramatically curtailed if the CCP wasn’t trying to hide and save face.
Now that the disease has spread globally, the true risks lie in the behaviours before and after the flight, not the flight. If we had efficient, reliable quick testing at airports, suddenly things change quite dramatically.
If the aviation industry collapses, the world economy is in a shyte load of trouble more than what it us now. Not going to happen.....
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was not offering an opinion but since you ask...
"To date, there has not been one documented case of a transmission of SARS COV 2 on an airline flight"
Maybe not in your world.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...5.2020.1800814
Old info BTW.
"To date, there has not been one documented case of a transmission of SARS COV 2 on an airline flight"
Maybe not in your world.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...5.2020.1800814
Old info BTW.
Last edited by currawong; 13th Sep 2020 at 05:53.