What is the relative Covid-19 risk of outdoor swimming right now?
lakespray
Senior Member
You can judge this for whatever it's worth. This abstract has not been peer reviewed. However it indicates that vast majority of Covid-19 transmission has happened indoors, not outdoors.
Indoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2
Hua Qian, Te Miao, Li LIU, Xiaohong Zheng, Danting Luo, Yuguo Li
This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed
… It is essential to understand where and how SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted. Methods: Case reports were extracted from the local Municipal Health Commissions of 320 prefectural cities (municipalities) in China, not including Hubei province, between 4 January and 11 February 2020. We identified all outbreaks involving three or more cases and reviewed the major characteristics of the enclosed spaces in which the outbreaks were reported and associated indoor environmental issues. Results: Three hundred and eighteen outbreaks with three or more cases were identified, involving 1245 confirmed cases in 120 prefectural cities. We divided the venues in which the outbreaks occurred into six categories: homes, transport, food, entertainment, shopping, and miscellaneous. Among the identified outbreaks, 53.8% involved three cases, 26.4% involved four cases, and only 1.6% involved ten or more cases. Home outbreaks were the dominant category (254 of 318 outbreaks; 79.9%), followed by transport (108; 34.0%; note that many outbreaks involved more than one venue category). Most home outbreaks involved three to five cases. **We identified only a single outbreak in an outdoor environment, which involved two cases. **Conclusions: All identified outbreaks of three or more cases occurred in an indoor environment, which confirms that sharing indoor space is a major SARS-CoV-2 infection risk. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1?fbclid=IwAR0CWY2-QjKbLDVN7irhoWixX7yVkzJkLeUog0WGFS-jpAv_mIRSiCuPry4
Another preliminary study found that the risk of “transmission from surfaces outdoors is lower during daylight” and under higher temperature and humidity conditions. “Sunlight destroys the virus quickly,” reads the briefing. https://www.yahoo.com/news/sunlight-destroys-coronavirus-very-quickly-new-government-tests-find-but-experts-say-pandemic-could-still-last-through-summer-200745675.html
Comments
I can't wait to get into the water. Just need beach parking to be opened back up.
We're all just carbon, water, starlight, oxygen and dreams
Can you take public transport rather than drive there?
No, at least not easily. And I can park much farther away and walk, but then I'm that guy walking blocks in grape smugglers to the beach, and on the reverse course I'm that guy shivering walking blocks in my togs.
We're all just carbon, water, starlight, oxygen and dreams
I have read two articles stating that beaches are dangerous because Covid-19 can get into the water via sewers, and then the surf and spray can spew it into the air. Not sure about the complete accuracy of that but......
But isn't the point that any non-essential activity isn't worth the risk, however slight, if it potentially exposes others to infection that you might be carrying but are unaware of? If you have to travel to get to OW, even in a car, you are risking an accident or breakdown; if you get into trouble in OW, valuable emergency resources would need to be diverted. We don't really know how long the virus survives on surfaces, and certainly in my neck of the North Yorkshire woods, if we're relying on ambient heat and sunlight to kill the virus, we're definitely going to be needing a vaccine! Public transport is a whole other thing again in terms of risk of spreading infection that you may be carrying unknowingly. I am as desperate to be swimming outdoors as the next person, but I strongly believe that for now social solidarity trumps the desire to swim, and that social solidarity is best expressed by those of us who can keeping our heads down and staying out of the way, so that those keeping our essential services up and running can maximise their chances of doing their jobs safely.
That said, my current fantasy is that I'm released out into a fully functioning world for just one single day - I would get my hair cut, get my creaking back decrunched by my osteopath, drive to the Lake District, swim around the biggest lake I can find until I'm completely exhausted, cook up a feast of beans on toast in the camper van and then fall into a deep, post-swim snooze. Not for a while maybe, but I can dream...
I agree that the biggest risk is that we really shouldn't be out of our houses right now. I do, however, think it is important to point out, @MLamby, that the scientist quoted in that article has come out to say she was misquoted and her comments were taken out of context. I can't get the source right now but I'll post it later if I can.
Overall, I think we need to stay home, but I also want to limit the spread of bad science.
Absolutely....which is why I finished with "not sure about the accuracy of this..."
@MLamby Sorry, missed that last sentence, it was early!
That series of two articles by the LA Times was a tragic case of really bad reporting and unclear, emerging science that was presented before it was fully baked. This was the first article: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-02/coronavirus-ocean-swimming-surfing-safe-beaches-los-angeles
A lot of us called bullshit on it because it relied so heavily on a chemist, rather than a virologist, and seemed to overlook some basic tenets of what we do know about the virus, namely that UV light destroys it and the Pacific Ocean is not the same as the local sewage plant. The researcher, Kim Prather, was barraged with all sorts of messages about how poorly done and sensationalized the piece was, to which she responded that her statements had been mangled by the reporter. Check out her lengthy Facebook post that explains that happened and what she was actually trying to say: https://www.facebook.com/kim.prather2/posts/10158026519302591
Now, as a member of the media myself, I'm cautious when someone insists they were taken out of context as a reason for defending a piece that met with a lot of criticism. It's an easy crutch to blame the messenger, especially when dealing with complicated material. But in this case, I believe the researcher.
Next, the reporter comes back with a second piece a few days later https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-11/coronavirus-danger-california-beaches that 's just as confusing as the first and does not actually correct the record, but rather doubles down on some previously bad reporting. I'm disappointed in the LA Times for how this was handled. I think a different reporter should have handled the follow up, or the paper should have issued a retraction of the first piece. Instead, it seems to be a source of increased traffic and thus is allowed to stand. This isn't a good look.
All that said, the simple answer to the original question is: stay the hell home. The more people try to circumvent stay-at-home orders and go swimming, the longer such orders are going to remain in place. It's like an old swim coach I had who would give sets verbally (never in writing) to force us to pay attention. If we did the set wrong, we'd just keep doing it until we finally got it right. There was one particularly complicated set that took us 3 tries to get right. We were supposed to do a 4K workout that day. We ended up at 10K because we just didn't get the message. It's kind of the same thing here: Stay home. Stay home. Stay home. And wash your filthy mitts.
Stop me if you've heard this one...
A grasshopper walks into a bar...
https://elainekhowley.com/
🤔🤐😷
Got desperate and went with hat in hand to ask a neighbor if I could use their above ground pool a few times a week. They said yes!! Guess I'm getting a tether!!!! Any suggestions on brand or style?? I didn't ask them if it was heated...........
@MLamby I have been using 2 that I like.
Waist tether, but also comes with single ankle strap: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MC937QL/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_image?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Ankle tether: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001Q3LT8M/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_image?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Ok, I'm jealous....
I have tethered to a hotel pool railing with a loop of elastic around one ankle, and the other end tied to the railing. Not fancy. Inch wide pajama elastic didn't roll. Anyone used to swimming with a tow buoy should be able to tie a length of rope to the strap and secure it to a post- maybe incorporating heavy duty bungie if you want a bit of stretch.
We have been fortunate here on the central California Coast. We had some time to observe how the pandemic is playing out elsewhere and take steps to shelter and prepare. Public pools closed mid-March, but we have mostly been able to continue swimming OW.
One of the more difficult times was a temporary but complete beach/water closure intended to deter tourists from visiting over Easter weekend. I found solace in immersing myself building a backyard pool which then begat the first documented crossing of the Circle Channel -- scroll down and look for Circle Channel "ratified" by Monterey Bay Swimming Association. Many thanks to Coach @joelwilson and MBSA, especially Scott Tapley for helping make this an "official" "swim" and to my partner Mark for videos.
I hoped others could benefit from my project, thus the Observer Report contains a parts list, for those interested.
@MLamby I have a DIY tether. Since I do stationary swimming, I don't want much give in the line. I wear a belt reclaimed from an old swim buoy, some nylon line, and short (~12-18") cargo bungee looped around a stout limb of a tree, with a little cardboard around the tree to protect the bark.
Alternately, this pool looks like a nice upgrade from mine and comes with a tether setup.
Take good care, all.