Chris Iddon
@chrisiddon.bsky.social
110 followers 290 following 280 posts
Music, walking, ventilation. Research fellow Chair of the CIBSE natural ventilation group
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
chrisiddon.bsky.social
and on a tangent on this, if there is some discrepancy and the 4000cf is correct, then they have sized to provide an additional 6.4ach which exceeds the CDC guidelines at the time of 5ach. So I'd still argue that these filters have been well sized for the application
Reposted by Chris Iddon
chrisiddon.bsky.social
A lot of the analysis on this misses the mark:
• “They weren’t on” — maybe, but filtration data says otherwise
• “Too small / not ASHRAE 241” — data disagrees.

And none of it actually says anything about transmission of respiratory illnesses.
🧵1/n
cidrap.bsky.social
HEPA purifiers not tied to less #viral exposure in elementary classrooms, analysis finds

#HEPA purifiers were associated with a 33% decrease in viral diversity, but the reduction wasn't linked to fewer school absences.

www.cidrap.umn.edu/i...
chrisiddon.bsky.social
Not that that seems to matter these days. As long as what you have to say meets your priors the accuracy doesn't matter 🙄
chrisiddon.bsky.social
I should clarify that the study did find that absences increased in those classrooms designated high viral load in the air, compared to low viral load. And that HEPA did not reduce your chance of being a high viral load classroom
chrisiddon.bsky.social
Air sampled for a week, frozen and analysed several years later. Some kind of preamplification then quantitative PCR. I imagine the most cost will be setting up air sample and collection.
chrisiddon.bsky.social
n this study we can conclude that increasing air cleaning with HEPA did not reduce the chance of being exposed to a class with a high viral load. We need more similar studies to see if there's an impact on incidence of these respiratory illnesses \end
jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...
Air Purifier Intervention for Respiratory Viral Exposure in Elementary Schools
This secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial examines the association of HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filters with respiratory viral exposure in elementary school classrooms.
jamanetwork.com
chrisiddon.bsky.social
That said, it seems the study thought they were adding an extra 6ach of clean air, but I get around 3ach and I think the discrepancy lies in two different classroom sizes 250m3 or 4000cf used by the authors 13/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
And they have 4 HEPA units giving the equivalent of 200L/s, so that is a total equivalent clean air of 408L/s. The average class occupancy is 19, therefore 21.5L/s/person which exceeds ASHRAE 241 20L/s/p requirement 12/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
They don't meet ASHRAE 241! Well this study pre-dates 241. But 241 looks for the total equivalent ventilation ie all removal mechanisms are additive, ventilation and filtration and bio decay (eg by UV). The average ventilation is 3ach and the average class 250m3 = 208L/s 11/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
That's not to say they may have been off some of the time. The researchers did go to lengths to reduce this happening eg over-riding the on/off switch and checking regularly that they were still plugged in. Anyway, i think we can say the HEPA was working to an extent 10/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
and so to the critiques - maybe they were turned off? Perhaps, but the data from the asthma study (ie the same data set) showed a 20-40% reduction in particulate material with the HEPA present. You wouldn't expect to see filters filtering if they were off! 9/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
The study provides no information on whether or not the presence of the HEPA had any impact on transmission of any of these respiratory illnesses or impacted absences. 8/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
This shows that infector viral emission rate matters — if it’s high, air concentration stays high even with more ventilation or cleaning. You can’t always clean your way out of a heavy emitter. (We suggested this earlier 👇) x.com/moog77/statu... 7/n
x.com
chrisiddon.bsky.social
In other words, HEPA use didn’t cut the odds of being in the high–viral load group (so, no clear exposure reduction). But the study’s too small to rule out a modest effect. 6/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
The study then uses a statistical model to group the airborne pathogen data into two categories: high and low viral load. About 22% of samples were in the high-load group — and HEPA use didn’t reduce the odds of being in it. 5/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
The results show an interesting spread of viruses that change in prevalence over the year (note there is no SARS-CoV-2 bcos this predates the pandemic, plenty of other coronaviruses tho) 4/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
at the same time they collected air samples from these classrooms and have analysed these samples recently to assess how much and how many pathogen genomic material are present in the air with and without HEPA 3/n
chrisiddon.bsky.social
A lot of the analysis on this misses the mark:
• “They weren’t on” — maybe, but filtration data says otherwise
• “Too small / not ASHRAE 241” — data disagrees.

And none of it actually says anything about transmission of respiratory illnesses.
🧵1/n
cidrap.bsky.social
HEPA purifiers not tied to less #viral exposure in elementary classrooms, analysis finds

#HEPA purifiers were associated with a 33% decrease in viral diversity, but the reduction wasn't linked to fewer school absences.

www.cidrap.umn.edu/i...
Reposted by Chris Iddon
chrisiddon.bsky.social
Want to know more about how airflow and risk modeling work? The full paper dives deep into the math, assumptions, and trade-offs 👉 doi.org/10.1016/j.bu...

#ventilation #indoorairquality #publichealth #ASHRAE241
/end
Redirecting
doi.org
chrisiddon.bsky.social
A great team effort from @benjonesieq.bsky.social, Marwa Zaatari, Pawel Wargocki and Richard Burns in providing this technical overview of the ANSI consensus process 10/n