WHO knew? Everyone except the worst hysterics at the CDC and the WHO, from the beginning

(Not exactly the same, but too good a picture to let fade into obscurity)

It turns out, those plastic COVID barriers were making things worse, not better

HOT AIR: “They were elementary and homemade at first before becoming commercialized and mass-produced, but plastic dividers became as commonplace during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic as the paper masks that now litter city streets.

“Put up with the aim of blocking droplets from the noses and mouths of the COVID-infected among us, they became a sort of virtue signal for businesses to show that they cared about the safety of their customers and employees. Plastic dividers popped up to separate Uber drivers from their passengers, supermarket cashiers from customers, students from teachers, and virtually every place there used to be unimpeded face-to-face interactions.

“Now that we've had more than a year of life peering through plastic at our fellow citizens, the science is starting to catch up with the craze and it turns out those measures may have actually increased the chances of people contracting the Wuhan coronavirus.

“As The New York Times recently reported, "scientists who study aerosols, air flow and ventilation say that much of the time, the barriers don't help and probably give people a false sense of security. And sometimes the barries can make things worse."

“How is that possible, you may ask, that one of the most prevalent forms of COVID theater aimed at preventing the spread of COVID was actually doing more harm than good? The Times explains:

Under normal conditions in stores, classrooms and offices, exhaled breath particles disperse, carried by air currents and, depending on the ventilation system, are replaced by fresh air roughly every 15 to 30 minutes. But erecting plastic barriers can change air flow in a room, disrupt normal ventilation and create "dead zones," where viral aerosol particles can build up and become highly concentrated.

“The New York Times admits that in some situations, such as a person sneezing or coughing, a plastic barrier can prevent large droplets from making direct contact with another person. But because the Wuhan coronavirus "spreads largely through unseen aerosol particles" barriers typically trap such aerosols until they're so concentrated they end up spreading beyond the clear walls aimed at keeping them in.

“And there are studies to back up the theory that our supposedly impenetrable plastic walls did more harm than good, as The New York Times reports:

A study published in June and led by researchers from Johns Hopkins, for example, showed that desk screens in classrooms were associated with an increased risk of coronavirus infection. In a Massachusetts school district, researchers found that plexiglass dividers with side walls in the main office were impeding air flow. A study looking at schools in Georgia found that desk barriers had little effect on the spread of the coronavirus compared with ventilation improvements and masking.

Before the pandemic, a study published in 2014 found that office cubicle dividers were among the factors that may have contributed to disease transmission during a tuberculosis outbreak in Australia.

British researchers have conducted modeling studies simulating what happens when a person on one side of a barrier — like a customer in a store — exhales particles while speaking or coughing under various ventilation conditions. The screen is more effective when the person coughs, because the larger particles have greater momentum and hit the barrier. But when a person speaks, the screen doesn’t trap the exhaled particles — which just float around it. While the store clerk may avoid an immediate and direct hit, the particles are still in the room, posing a risk to the clerk and others who may inhale the contaminated air.

no. just … no.

A year ago,* Forbes ran an article debunking face shields and plexiglass barriers, and NY Magazine reported on this same ineffectiveness back in March, citing studies dating back to the start of the panic, but shields — and surface disinfecting — continue. A good crisis is too good to waste.

It is, of course, obvious that sitting with your head penned inside a three-sided box all day is not conducive to learning or communicating. The desktop partitions (often referred to as “sneeze guards”) that are the primary form of barrier used in schools come in a variety of shapes, materials, and sizes. The best, and most expensive, are made of hard clear plastic and have no metal or colored-plastic seams or borders that obstruct views. The worst are made of cardboard and flimsy plastic, somewhat akin to thick cellophane, with opaque borders running across the top and vertically between the front and side panels. With these barriers, it’s as if every student were stuck in an obstructed-view seat at a Broadway show; often, they have to crane their necks just to see the board or teacher. Students also report that with the partitions around their heads, they at many times can’t hear their teachers or each other, so they end up speaking louder (which emits more particles from their lungs) or lean outside the barriers to hear or be heard — which, of course, defeats their purpose.

Of the half dozen experts I interviewed for this article, not one could name a study or datum that suggests desktop shields in schools offer any substantial safety advantage, and all said that any benefits would be especially unlikely to be felt when other mitigation measures are already in place.

*As did FWIW, as we did again this past June: “COVID Theatre”.

Hmm — links aren’t working, damn it; try the search feature, using “plexiglass”. Or here’s a quote from an article I cited, dating back to the Vice Presidential debate in October, 2020:

"Those plexiglass barriers are really only going to be effective if the vice president or Kamala Harris are spitting at each other," Boston University epidemiologist Ellie Murray explained to the Times. "Those are really just splatter shields." Linsey Marr, a scientist at Virginia Tech whose expertise is in airborne transmission, actually laughed out loud when she saw the stage's set up, explaining that the barriers "are even smaller and less adequate than I imagined."

Joseph Allen, a ventilation expert at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told the Times that it's not just about the danger to Pence, Harris, and the moderator: "My biggest concern," he said, "is that millions of people will be getting the message that this is what an effective set of controls looks like."