2/2 So I drafted a comment, suggesting that infections *are not* inevitable and that doctors need to talk to aerosol engineers and develop a truly preventative strategy.
Happily I can report that the comment was accepted and is now published alongside the article (see screenshots below).

Thanks @drinfosec.bsky.social - I don't consider myself a UVC 'expert' but I have a science background and am very interested in the potential of this technology for public health.
I'm doing less on SM at present for various reasons, but I hope to migrate some of my information posts from X to Bsky.

Hi Nancy. Thankyou.
New to Blue Sky and just looked at who had liked @taniaspencer.bsky.social 's posts on my article and followed them.

3/3 Businesses are increasingly seeing the cost effectiveness of clean air investments, like clean water, but in the public health realm the penny has not yet dropped that the 'do nothing' option is the least cost effective.

2/3 Clean air is often dismissed as "too expensive", but investing in "..safe, disease free water is never questioned, and is accepted as the status quo."
Find me anyone who wants less clean water!

This is the paradox I explore.

2/2 The stark difference in approach to the vax and non-vax tech has been astonishing. After publishing the above substack article I was contacted by a UVC conference participant with the below message. My fear is that Far-UVC is being largely ignored, even by the CC community.