Covid-19 could survive up to 17 days on surfaces

[Miss Hunter]

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e3.htm?s_cid=mm6912e3_w


A high proportion of asymptomatic infections could partially explain the high attack rate among cruise ship passengers and crew. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was identified on a variety of surfaces in cabins of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infected passengers up to 17 days after cabins were vacated on the Diamond Princess but before disinfection procedures had been conducted (Takuya Yamagishi, National Institute of Infectious Diseases, personal communication, 2020). Although these data cannot be used to determine whether transmission occurred from contaminated surfaces, further study of fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 aboard cruise ships is warranted.

 

[Miss Hunter]

This study was done inside the cabins. I'm curious about how long Covid-19 survives on surfaces exposed to sunlight/uv light.

If anyone comes across that information please post it here.

 

[Miss Hunter]

This is a literature review that was done on the effectiveness of "open air treatment" on the Spanish Flu, other Influenza pandemics and tuberculosis.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504358/

In general, viruses and bacteria usually don't tend to fair well when exposed to sunlight.

 

[Reference3A]

Yes. I heard about this as well. 17 days on surfaces is kinda scary and goes to show how dangerous it really is.
I respect how your researching the science of it all. You and I Had a disagreement on here awhile ago. No hard feelings ok. Good luck to you Miss Hunter .
Stay Safe

 

[UhOh]

Reports say the virus genome was detectable. It was not in an infectible form.

 

[Miss Hunter]

Reports say the virus genome was detectable. It was not in an infectible form.

From my understanding is that if RNA is intact a virus still has the ability to replicate once it finds itself in an ideal environment

 

[UhOh]

From my understanding is that if RNA is intact a virus still has the ability to replicate once it finds itself in an ideal environment

The article I read on the topic was written by an epidemiologist who seemed to think it wasn't something to worry about and also not a surprising find. Could be a grey areas where the experts disagree on its infection risk.

 

[treveller]

There is probably a big difference between detecting covid-19 RNA and finding infectious virus particles. There is more to a virus than its RNA. Here is an article from Ontario Health regarding the viability of covid-19 on surfaces.

https://www.publichealthontario.ca/...arch-nejm-aerosol-surface-stability.pdf?la=en

I suspect the article that made the comment about 17 days was looking at how wide spread the virus had been on the ship.

 

[Miss Hunter]

There is probably a big difference between detecting covid-19 RNA and finding infectious virus particles. There is more to a virus than its RNA. Here is an article from Ontario Health regarding the viability of covid-19 on surfaces.

https://www.publichealthontario.ca/...arch-nejm-aerosol-surface-stability.pdf?la=en

I suspect the article that made the comment about 17 days was looking at how wide spread the virus had been on the ship.

As long as the RNA is intact, an RNA virus can begin to replicate once it finds itself in an ideal environment.

Covid-19 is an RNA virus. RNA viruses have the ability to mutate an alarming rate because they lack a “proofreading function” in their genome.

For example if DNA throws out a mutation during replication, it can usually step back and correct the error. Occasionally DNA replication will throw off a mutation that doesn’t get corrected but it’s pretty rare. RNA is much less stable than DNA. RNA cannot correct itself after it fucks up during replication.

 

[Miss Hunter]

What gives the results of a study more weight is if other researchers are able to replicate the study and find the same results.

But another thing to keep in mind considering Covid-19 has the ability to mutate so quickly, it is possible that researchers in different places could be conducting studies on different forms of the virus and therefore finding different results.

 

[Miss Hunter]

^^ if anyone understands this shit better than me, feel free to speak up. My formal education in the realm of viruses and viral replication is limited. I am no expert. But it is an interesting subject.

 

[rlock]

My understanding is that the virus doesn't like porous, textured surfaces.

Research seems to state 3-4 days on plastic, stainless, but only 24 hours on cardboard. Bacteria are generally more durable in the environment than viruses. Stomach bacteria can persist for weeks, which makes sense, since they are evolved to live in an acidic environment, hence need to be tougher than something targeting the vacation-like environment in the lungs (humid and warm).

DNA is double stranded and contains, essential identical copies of the genome. This allows redundancy and a mechanism for error corrections (mutations mostly occur in one strand and not the other, and can be located by "comparing" the two sequences).

RNA is single stranded hence there is no redundancy and mutations proliferate with greater ease. It is generally accepted that a large percentage of mutations are detrimental, or lethal to the organism, making those individuals less fit to the environment. Occasionally a mutation is beneficial, and the individuals with it thrive. In turn the mutated individuals outcompete the "regular" ones and become the dominant strain.

I don't believe RNA can replicate itself without the aid of organelles/enzymes within the virus.

I am a general biologist, not a geneticist or microbiologist. Smarter folk feel free to correct.

This sounds like what I've been hearing elsewhere.
Worst culprits are smooth surfaces like plastic, glass (yeah, disinfect that cel-phone !), and stainless steel. (And tile?)

I have assumed that cloth surfaces do not hold it alive for long, especially if dry. (Dryness destroys it, I have heard. Laundering definitely destroys it.) I expected cardboard and newspaper would be similar, given more time, but I guess I was wrong?

What I have not heard anything about so far is wood (tables, chairs, shelves), and unusual cloth types (example: leather for jackets, upholstery, shoes).

Also, I see people wearing rubber (latex or nitrile) gloves. Great for being impervious to fluid and typical for disposable gloves - but regular people are using them long-term, so does the virus live or die on those?

Rubbing alcohol, bleach cleaners, peroxide, even regular soap = essential.

 

[treveller]

You can't simply talk about how long a virus lasts on a surface because the virus particles don't all die at once. When a study says the virus lasted 4 days on stainless steel it also needs to say what they mean by "lasted". They might say LD50 (length of time till death of 50% of the virus) for the virus was 4 days. That would be the half life of the virus on that surface. Material I read this morning explained that a study saying the virus lasted a week on plastic also said that at 1 week only 0.1% of the virus was viable. It is conceivably possible but not likely that this could infect anyone under any circumstances.

Miss Hunter, I agree viruses are an interesting subject. You said "As long as the RNA is intact, an RNA virus can begin to replicate once it finds itself in an ideal environment." Maybe not. My understanding is that the virus is surrounded by a protein shell which is in turn surrounded by a layer off fat and receptors that lock on to a human cell. When it locks onto a healthy human cell it injects its RNA into the cell and the cell then replicates the virus until the cell dies and disgorges many new virus particles. It takes way more than intact RNA. I understand alcohol kills the virus by disrupting the layer of fat. I heard no mention of damage to the RNA. Just recollection here. Feel free to correct me.

 

[throwaway420]

You can't simply talk about how long a virus lasts on a surface because the virus particles don't all die at once. When a study says the virus lasted 4 days on stainless steel it also needs to say what they mean by "lasted". They might say LD50 (length of time till death of 50% of the virus) for the virus was 4 days. That would be the half life of the virus on that surface. Material I read this morning explained that a study saying the virus lasted a week on plastic also said that at 1 week only 0.1% of the virus was viable. It is conceivably possible but not likely that this could infect anyone under any circumstances.

Miss Hunter, I agree viruses are an interesting subject. You said "As long as the RNA is intact, an RNA virus can begin to replicate once it finds itself in an ideal environment." Maybe not. My understanding is that the virus is surrounded by a protein shell which is in turn surrounded by a layer off fat and receptors that lock on to a human cell. When it locks onto a healthy human cell it injects its RNA into the cell and the cell then replicates the virus until the cell dies and disgorges many new virus particles. It takes way more than intact RNA. I understand alcohol kills the virus by disrupting the layer of fat. I heard no mention of damage to the RNA. Just recollection here. Feel free to correct me.

+1 to this. Im not a doctor or anything but from my understanding RNA is merely an instruction set that hijacks your body's cell's replicating function. It will use your cells to replicate the virus instead of your own cells when infected. However the RNA has to be injected into your cells. It is injected when the virus' proteins binds to a certain receptor on your cells (ACE 2 receptor).

When you wash your hands with soap, the soap will tear the layer of fat apart along with the binding proteins therefore rendering it useless to infect your cells. It does not destroy the RNA.