Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Weird homes

Home is where the heart is, no matter what unusual form that home may take.  Slideshow 

Photo

The drone wars

The frontlines of America's covert drone program.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

How far do your sneeze and cough go? Experts study

Related News

Related Topics

SINGAPORE | Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:56pm EST

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Ever wondered how far your sneeze goes? Or if you can stop germs from spreading by cupping your mouth with your hand when you cough?

With a giant mirror and high-speed camera, scientists in Singapore are trying to find out how airborne transmission of flu viruses takes place, or if it happens at all.

The equipment allows them to observe real-time a person's spray of minute liquid droplets when coughing, sneezing, laughing and talking, and they hope the results can be used to make better guidelines for infection control.

"It's really to inform infection control teams, because there is controversy now about which pathogens, e.g. flu, are airborne and if so, how significant this route is compared to others, such as direct contact," said team leader Julian Tang, a virologist and consultant with Singapore's National University Hospital.

While it is likely a flu sufferer can infect others by coughing or sneezing, little is known about the distances a cough or sneeze travels and the volume of air -- and viruses -- packed into it.

Are flu viruses transmitted whilst airborne? Which is more dangerous: coughing or sneezing, or even laughing?

Infection control guidelines are mostly based on modeling studies and expert estimates, not hard scientific data.

In their S$1.08 million ($833,000) study, funded by the National Medical Research Council of Singapore, Tang and colleagues designed a large concave mirror, akin to those used in astronomical telescopes.

Along with a camera that can capture up to 250,000 frames per second, the scientists can observe the aerosol, or spray, produced by a cough or sneeze across the mirror.

BEWARE LAUGHING, SINGING

Using volunteers, Tang and his colleagues will study the velocity and distance of exhaled airflows, or plumes, produced by coughs and sneezes, and even laughing, crying, singing, whistling, talking, snoring and breathing.

"We will be studying these other forms of plumes, where possible, as all forms of exhaled jets have the potential to carry infectious agents over greater distances," Tang said.

They will evaluate interventions such as coughing into a loosely clenched fist, a tissue and different types of face masks to see how effective they are in containing airflows.

"What people do every day, we can visualize in real-time. Studying intervention is very important because we want to know how effective they are," Tang said.

"This may have budgetary implications when planning for the next pandemic."

With better knowledge of airflows, the scientists hope to make improved recommendations for infection control, such as how far apart to place hospital beds and quarantine measures to be taken in a place found to be housing a person with an airborne infection, such as measles, flu and drug-resistant tuberculosis.

From images seen so far, whistling and laughing appear to spread infection very effectively.

"Laughing produces a surprisingly strong, diffuse, exhaled plume, and I suspect that singing (especially trained operatic singing) will produce an even stronger, more penetrating plume," Tang said.

"However, whether they will lead to infection and disease depends on many other factors, such as virus survival and host immune responses - which other teams are studying."

(Editing by Maggie Fox and Ron Popeski)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
Eric.Klein wrote:
Mythbusters did this last season. They have nice reproducible results.

Jan 11, 2011 5:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
dzoo35 wrote:
Yes, because Mythbusters is the pinnacle of peer-reviewed scientific inquiry.

Maybe if they did a show on AIDS the millions of Africans would be saved. How selfish of them to overlook such a cause.

Jan 11, 2011 3:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
johannesg wrote:
Eric – you’re right, and such shows/efforts can act as starting points for further, more detailed, more rigorous research with more participants.

Perhaps other posters feel the need to send a letter to Pres. Obama chiding him for wasting time with such shows in an attempt to raise interest in science.

I’m personally not sure, though, that an “Obama/The Lancet” special would have inspired more scientific curiosity amongst target demographic early teens, leading ultimately to more discovery, perhaps even ultimately addressing AIDS.

Jan 11, 2011 6:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.