[echelon]

Not at all!

Viruses come in many shapes and forms. One of the major features of viruses is whether they have a viral envelope (derived from the host plasma membrane lipid bilayer) or a protein capsid shell.

The structure of capsids can make them more or less hearty.

Luckily for us, Covid-19 and coronaviruses in general have viral envelopes. These are easy to disrupt with soap and susceptible to the environment.

Polio, on the other hand, was damned near impossible to be rid of. Capsids can be resilient.

Other major features are the nucleic acid family (RNA or DNA), encoding (single or doubly stranded, multiple senses), and these impact mutation rate and what host or viral machinery is used. RNA doesn't survive as long as DNA, but that doesn't matter if the virus is in a good environment.

[NegatioN]

So we're accepting E.coli as a benchmark here, because we're pretty sure it destroys the viral envelope?

Why is this more than a guesstimate? It strikes me as odd to test for virus disinfection by using a bacteria, but I am a complete noob in this field.

[compiler-guy]

You did read the author's qualifications, did you not?

Consider your qualifications, ('I am a complete noob in this field.') compared to theirs.

Amy Price, DPhil (Oxon) ... earned her Doctorate in Evidence Based Health Care at The University ofOxford.

Larry Chu, MD, MS (Epidemiology) ....

If anyone understands the science, and the limitations of their study, it is themselves and they caveated their conclusions carefully.

Is it peer reviewed? No. But it is the best science we have at the moment.

A noob in the field isn't going to find a hole in two minutes that two serious professionals haven't thought about.

[NegatioN]

I'm not asking, because I don't trust that this is the best information we have. I am asking, because I want to understand more about how certain the people who understand the subject are about this recommendation.

I thought we (as a computer science-centric population) valued learning over credentials?

I didn't mean to come off as agressively taking a stance, which is /why/ I wrote that I don't know anything about this topic.

[compiler-guy]

They carefully caveated their results, and we all know this isn't peer-reviewed or replicated--although it has been informally reviewed by other scientists.

But it is also very safe to say that serious scientists don't put forth studies that someone completely uncredentialled can poke a hole in with two minutes of thought.

[ebrenes]

Read the article completely or the comments. Your question has been addressed multiple times in this thread.

[NegatioN]

So, I tried reading quite a bit of the comments, and the whole article before commenting.

I might have misunderstood the wording:

"4C Air confirmed all the proposed treatments have killed corona viruses. Labs have no way to test COVID-19 directly and as an accepted protocol, E. Coli is used for testing."

I understood this as: There has been no testing using corona viruses (because there's no way to do so currently?), but instead they're benchmarking with E. coli.(because this has some sort of similar attributes)

But what it's saying is(?): Testing has been done on E.coli AND corona viruses, but there's no standardized protocol for corona viruses, which is why they're focusing on the E.coli aspect.

Please do not assume malintent, even though I know these are stressful times, and we'd do well to let important information surface to the general population, I think a part of that is to understand the limitations of that information as well.