SignificanceLack of human data on influenza virus aerosol shedding fuels debate over the importance of airborne transmission. We provide overwhelming evidence that humans generate infectious aerosols and quantitative data to improve mathematical models of transmission and public health interventions. We show that sneezing is rare and not important for—and that coughing is not required for—influenza virus aerosolization. Our findings, that upper and lower airway infection are independent and that fine-particle exhaled aerosols reflect infection in the lung, opened a pathway for a deeper understanding of the human biology of influenza infection and transmission. Our observation of an association between repeated vaccination and increased viral aerosol generation demonstrated the power of our method, but needs confirmation.

Little is known about the amount and infectiousness of influenza virus shed into exhaled breath.This contributes to uncertainty about the importance of airborne influenza transmission. We screened 355 symptomatic volunteers with acute respiratory illness and report 142 cases with confirmed influenza infection who provided 218 paired nasopharyngeal (NP) and 30-minute breath samples (coarse >5 µm and fine ≤5 µm fractions) on days 1 to 3 post symptom onset. We assessed viral RNA copy number for all samples and cultured NP swabs and fine aerosols. We SignificanceLack of human data on influenza virus aerosol shedding fuels debate over the importance of airborne transmission. We provide overwhelming evidence that humans generate infectious aerosols and quantitative data to improve mathematical models of transmission and public health interventions. We show that sneezing is rare and not important for, and that coughing is not required for influenza virus aerosolization. Our findings, that upper and lower airway infection are independent and that fine particle exhaled aerosols reflect infection in the lung, open a new pathway for understanding the human biology of influenza infection and transmission. Our observation of an association between repeated vaccination and increased viral aerosol generation demonstrated the power of our method, but needs confirmation.All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.

Background SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology implicates airborne transmission; aerosol infectiousness and impacts of masks and variants on aerosol shedding are not well understood. Methods We recruited COVID-19 cases to give blood, saliva, mid-turbinate and fomite (phone) swabs, and 30-minute breath samples while vocalizing into a Gesundheit-II, with and without masks at up to two visits two days apart. We quantified and sequenced viral RNA, cultured virus, and assayed sera for anti-spike and anti-receptor binding domain antibodies. Results We enrolled 49 seronegative cases (mean days post onset 3.8 ±2.1), May 2020 through April 2021. We detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 45% of fine (≤5 µm), 31% of coarse (>5 µm) aerosols, and 65% of fomite samples overall and in all samples from four alpha-variant cases. Masks reduced viral RNA by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 72%) in fine and by 77% (95% CI, 51 to 89%) in coarse aerosols; cloth and surgical masks were not significantly different. The alpha variant was associated with a 43-fold (95% CI, 6.6 to 280-fold) increase in fine aerosol viral RNA, compared with earlier viruses, that remained a significant 18-fold (95% CI, 3.4 to 92-fold) increase adjusting for viral RNA in saliva, swabs, and other potential confounders. Two fine aerosol samples, collected while participants wore masks, were culture-positive. Conclusion SARS-CoV-2 is evolving toward more efficient aerosol generation and loose-fitting masks provide significant but only modest source control. Therefore, until vaccination rates are very high, continued layered controls and tight-fitting masks and respirators will be necessary.

A B S T R A C TStrategies to protect building occupants from the risk of acute respiratory infection (ARI) need to consider ventilation for its ability to dilute and remove indoor bioaerosols. Prior studies have described an association of increased self-reported colds and influenza-like symptoms with low ventilation but have not combined rigorous characterization of ventilation with assessment of laboratory confirmed infections. We report a study designed to fill this gap. We followed laboratory confirmed ARI rates and measured CO 2 concentrations for four months during the winter-spring of 2018 in two campus residence halls: (1) a high ventilation building (HVB) with a dedicated outdoor air system that supplies 100% of outside air to each dormitory room, and (2) a low ventilation building (LVB) that relies on infiltration as ventilation. We enrolled 11 volunteers for a total of 522 person-days in the HVB and 109 volunteers for 6069 person-days in the LVB, and tested upper-respiratory swabs from symptomatic cases and their close contacts for the presence of 44 pathogens using a molecular assay. We observed one ARI case in the HVB (0.70/person-year) and 47 in the LVB (2.83/person-year). Simultaneously, 154 CO 2 sensors distributed primarily in the dormitory rooms collected 668,390 useful data points from over 1 million recorded data points. Average and standard deviation of CO 2 concentrations were 1230 ppm and 408 ppm in the HVB, and 1492 ppm and 837 ppm in the LVB, respectively. Importantly, this study developed and calibrated multi-zone models for the HVB with 229 zones and 983 airflow paths, and for the LVB with 529 zones and 1836 airflow paths by using a subset of CO 2 data for model calibration. The models were used to calculate ventilation rates in the two buildings and potential for viral aerosol migration between rooms in the LVB. With doors and windows closed, the average ventilation rate was 12 L/s in the HVB dormitory rooms and 4 L/s in the LVB dormitory rooms. As a result, residents had on average 6.6 L/(s person) of outside air in the HVB and 2.3 L/(s person) in the LVB. LVB rooms located at the leeward side of the building had smaller average ventilation rates, as well as a somewhat higher ARI incidence rate and average CO 2 concentrations when compared to those values in the rooms located at the windward side of the building. Average ventilation rates in twenty LVB dormitory rooms increased from 2.3 L/s to 7.5 L/s by opening windows, 3.6 L/s by opening doors, and 8.8 L/s by opening both windows and doors. Therefore, opening both windows and doors in the LVB dormitory rooms can increase ventilation rates to the levels comparable to those in the HVB. But it can also have a negative effect on thermal comfort due to low outdoor temperatures. Simulation results identified an aerobiologic pathway from a room occupied by an index case of influenza A to a room occupied by a possible secondary case.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology implicates airborne transmission; mask source-control efficacy for, variant impact on, and infectiousness of aerosols are not well understood. Methods: We recruited COVID-19 cases to give blood, saliva, mid-turbinate and fomite (phone) swabs, and 30-minute breath samples while vocalizing into a Gesundheit-II, with and without masks at up to two visits two days apart. We quantified and sequenced viral RNA, cultured virus, and assayed sera for anti-spike and anti-receptor binding domain antibodies. Results: We enrolled 61 participants with active infection, May 2020 through April 2021. Among 49 seronegative cases (mean days post onset 3.8 ±2.1), we detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 45% of fine (≥5 μm), 31% of coarse (>5 μm) aerosols, and 65% of fomite samples overall and in all samples from four alpha variant cases. Masks reduced viral RNA by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 72%) in fine and by 77% (95% CI, 51 to 89%) in coarse aerosols. The alpha variant was associated with a 43-fold (95% CI, 6.6 to 280-fold) increase in fine aerosol viral RNA that remained a significant 18-fold (95% CI, 3.4 to 92-fold) increase adjusting for viral RNA in saliva, in mid-turbinate swabs, and other potential confounders. Two fine aerosol samples, collected days 2-3 post illness onset, while participants wore masks, were culture-positive. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 is evolving toward more efficient airborne transmission and loose-fitting masks provide significant but only modest source control. Therefore, until vaccination rates are very high, continued layered controls and tight-fitting masks and respirators will be necessary.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Uncertainty about the importance of influenza transmission by airborne droplet nuclei generates controversy for infection control. Human challenge-transmission studies have been supported as the most promising approach to fill this knowledge gap. Healthy, seronegative volunteer 'Donors' (n = 52) were randomly selected for intranasal challenge with influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2). 'Recipients' randomized to Intervention (IR, n = 40) or Control (CR, n = 35) groups were exposed to Donors for four days. IRs wore face shields and hand sanitized frequently to limit large droplet and contact transmission. One transmitted infection was confirmed by serology in a CR, yielding a secondary attack rate of 2.9% among CR, 0% in IR (p = 0.47 for group difference), and 1.3% overall, significantly less than 16% (p<0.001) expected based on a proof-of-concept study secondary attack rate and considering that there were twice as many Donors and days of exposure. The main difference between these studies was mechanical building ventilation in the follow-on study, suggesting a possible role for aerosols.

The evolution of SARS-CoV-2 virus has resulted in variants likely to be more readily transmitted through respiratory aerosols, underscoring the increased potential for indoor environmental controls to mitigate risk. Use of tight-fitting face masks to trap infectious aerosol in exhaled breath and reduce inhalation exposure to contaminated air is of critical importance for disease control. Administrative controls including the regulation of occupancy and interpersonal spacing are also important, while presenting social and economic challenges. Indoor engineering controls including ventilation, exhaust, air flow control, filtration, and disinfection by germicidal ultraviolet irradiation can reduce reliance on stringent occupancy restrictions. However, the effects of controls-individually and in combination-on reducing infectious aerosol transfer indoors remain to be clearly characterized to the extent needed to support widespread implementation by building operators. We review aerobiologic and epidemiologic evidence of indoor environmental controls against transmission and present a quantitative aerosol transfer scenario illustrating relative differences in exposure at close-interactive, room, and building scales. We identify an overarching need for investment to implement building controls and evaluate their effectiveness on infection in well-characterized and real-world settings, supported by specific, methodological advances. Improved understanding of engineering control effectiveness guides implementation at scale while considering occupant comfort, operational challenges, and energy costs. at close-interactive, room (even at distances much greater than two meters), and building scales. We illustrate the relative respiratory aerosol transfer and exposure at these scales, provide an overview of the scientific basis of engineering controls that can be deployed in buildings to reduce transfer between people, and outline priority research directions to guide widespread implementation of controls in buildings.