A new study finds that airplanes are not the vaunted cesspool that they were perceived to be. Also, I admit I was wrong about middle seats.
If you are considering booking travel or signing up for a new credit card please click here. Both support LiveAndLetsFly.com.
If you haven’t followed us on Facebook or Instagram, add us today.
Chances of Contracting COVID-19 On Plane “Slim”
A new study (not yet reviewed by peers because it was just released) finds that chances are slim to none that a COVID-19 negative person will contract the disease from being on an airplane. Faye Flam of Bloomberg wrote an excellent piece last week on the findings.
“Arnold Barnett, a professor of management science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has been trying to quantify the odds of catching Covid-19 from flying. He’s factored in a bunch of variables, including the odds of being seated near someone in the infectious stage of the disease, and the odds that the protection of masks (now required on most flights) will fail. He’s accounted for the way air is constantly renewed in airplane cabins, which experts say makes it very unlikely you’ll contract the disease from people who aren’t in your immediate vicinity — your row, or, to a lesser extent, the person across the aisle, the people ahead of you or the people behind you.” – Flam, Bloomberg. August 5th, 2020
Barnett showed that failures would have to take place to achieve even these numbers. Masks would have to fail (presumably on both the contagious and the victim), that the flight was shoulder to shoulder fully booked (significantly doubtful) and that you happen to sit next to them. Not impossible, but no one in Vegas is betting those odds.
Comparative Odds
It’s important to note that before COVID-19 we all took health risks when flying and some of us got sick. Each member of my family came back from Disney sick each and every visit despite efforts to mitigate with handwashing, sanitizer, and avoiding handrails. It happens. But COVID-19 is different so it’s fair to want to have an understanding of just how risky a flight is compared with other activities.
- 1:4300 – Chance of contracting COVID-19 on a two-hour, packed flight
- 1:7700 – Chance of contracting COVID-19 on the same flight with an open middle seat
- 1:400,000-600,000 – Chance of dying from contracting on a plane
- 1:400,000-600,000 – Chance of dying when contracting anywhere on the ground
- 1:9 – Chance of males developing prostate cancer
- 1:8 – Chance of females developing breast cancer
- 1:103 – Chance of dying in a car crash
- 1:556 – Chance of dying as a pedestrian
In fact, airplanes may be a safer place to be (when concerned with recycled air) than the hospital:
“Bromage says that the air exchange system in planes is better than in hospitals, with the air in the cabin being completely replaced 30 times every hour.”
That supports comments I made in the past, that there were fewer people in close proximity on my last flight than when visiting a Wal-Mart. If you’re worried about the cleaning crews efficiency on airplane gate turns, think about the last time the handle at the gas station was sanitized yet no one is saying “don’t get gas.”
The study also did not state the effect of the immune population nor of those with antibodies to the virus, both of which would have made the odds even longer. However, it also did not take into account the rest of the journey to and from the airport including TSA interactions.
Can We All Go Flying Again, Now?
Another UMass professor flies every week but is approaching travel in the same way they approach everything else – carefully.
“University of Massachusetts biology professor Erin Bromage says he is flying every week, as he advises federal, state and district courts on how to reopen while minimizing risks. Whereas many experts are taking a zero-tolerance for risk approach, he’s trying to find a middle ground — and helping others do it in a rational way.
It wasn’t just this one study and a colleague from UMass that supports this information,
“Real-world data bodes well for flying, too. Australia has been using contact tracing to investigate Covid transmission on hundreds of flights, and has found that while infected people got on planes, nobody got infected on a plane. Worldwide, there have been a couple of individual transmissions possibly linked to flights, but no superspreading-type events.”
Should we all take off the masks and get on planes? No. The data is clear about this. However, even on American and United flights where the middle seat is not guaranteed to be open (as it is on JetBlue, Southwest and Delta Air Lines for example) load factors suggest it’s highly likely that if you want an open middle seat you’ll get one.
Considering an airplane with 180 seats in coach, carriers that block the middle seat may have up to 120 seats taken. However, the reason why I stated that those bold moves were “mostly a marketing stunt” is because that implies a 66.67% load factor – something none of the airlines is currently reporting. Families still sit together which reduces the need for a guaranteed open middle seat, and because those people have been associated with each other prior to the flight, they do not add to the risk of contraction.
The virus is real and we should treat it as such. Our experience in this process has reminded (and for some, educated) us all on good sanitation habits. The people being smirked at for wiping down a tray table are being asked for tips instead. But traveling is not akin to murdering someone’s grandmother as one commenter accused me of doing merely by stepping foot on a plane (for the avoidance of doubt, on that trip I was one of six passengers in a 52 seat cabin with no more than two people in a row of 13 seats.)
I Was Wrong
Interested in a half-apology? Here’s one:
“I was wrong when I said that an open middle seat was only marginally better than a fully packed plane, in fact, it reduces the chances of contracting the disease by almost half.”
However, my assumption of just how likely one was to contract the disease on a plane anyway was highly flawed and it’s far less likely than previously thought. To be the one person that contracts COVID-19 on an airplane you’d likely have to have flown 24 flights since February without factoring in immunity. Many flight attendants would have loved to have been that busy during the period.
Conclusion
The odds are indeed slim that passengers will contract COVID-19 on an airplane. While the study is not yet peer-reviewed, data from Australia and other governments support the claim. The virus is real and we should take precautions to protect ourselves and others, but some of these precautions should have been taken anyway regardless of the virus to avoid getting sick (wash your hands!) If we all board jets right now, yes more people will get sick in a nominal fashion, but given low load factors, mandatory use of masks, and the limited use of air travel due to closed air markets – chances are very, very low. And the rates to fly couldn’t be better.
What do you think? Assuming the study referenced and supporting study from Australia are true, will you be getting back on an airplane? Does this study change your thought process?
I respectfully disagree. The 1:9 chance of a male developing prostate cancer is based on a LIFETIME and includes mild atypical cells, not metastatic cancer. The reported chances on a flight is based on one flight. I think there is insufficient data to make such conclusion.
As for me, I may be ill with Covid-19 now. It is terrible. Based on my symptoms during the past 4 days, I believe that I will not die but am keeping watch for sudden shortness of breath. I got my exposure from traveling. I thought I was playing it safe by driving and not eating in restaurants. I brought my own food. My exposure was minimal (gas stations, hotels, one very quick supermarket trip and one visit to the DMV for 20 minutes at opening time on the day before travel). All the time, I had Lysol spray (used in the hotel room), hand sanitizer and wore a N95 (not KN95) mask when not in the car and not inside the hotel room.
I was going to say the same thing – comparing a single 2 hour flight risk to a lifetime risk of something else is disingenuous at best
The other item barely being mentioned here is all of the other increased risk activities that occur when traveling. Not just the airport activities, but those traveling will be more likely to dine out, participate in small group activities, share a car with an Uber/Lyft driver, etc.
@Derek – Thank you for your comment and for reading the blog. Perhaps I should have added some context as to why I included cancer odds of contraction but here is why I included it as it is right now.
1) The flight is short and the chances of contracting are low. Due to the limited nature of travel for leisure (as there is no business flying right now) the elevated risk over staying captive inside your home has been inflated by hyperbole, and not facts.
2) The cancer figures are over a lifetime, but far higher than I would have imagined. If I had replaced the liklihood of dying of COVID-19 contracted on a plane to dying as a pedestrian (1:256) would everyone urge people to avoid walking down the street? Would businesses shut down? Of course not.
That said, if I removed the cancer statistics, you’d still disagree with the piece based on insufficient data (assumption based on your comment.) Focusing on that for a moment, to dismiss this study is one thing, but then you’d also have to ignore the Australian contact tracing study I cited that found no credible cases of contraction on an airplane. You’d also have ignore the fact that the study assumes faulty masks and a packed flight. If we concede the point on the mask (either because of re-use or misapplication by the wearer) you’d certainly have to concur that airplanes just aren’t flying at even 66% full moving the risk to the even lower odds of 1:7700. Right?
@Ben – I did mention in the post other risks that were not measured in the study under the odds section.
“However, it also did not take into account the rest of the journey to and from the airport including TSA interactions.”
But the assumption that Lyft/Uber for airport transportation may also be flawed. Some of those riders are taking far more Lyft/Uber rides at home than the airport trip. If this is measured against an assumption that but for the purpose of this one flight, the same person would not ride in an Uber, or interact with other people on par with the nearly empty security lines and abandoned terminals that are what travel is right now,then perhaps those risks should be factored. But if they are going to the store, grabbing handrails in a public park, pressing the unsanitized buzzer on a friend’s apartment, then you’re right, the risk is higher. But if they are doing those other things, it seems neglible to include a pair of Uber rides as elevating the risk of contraction by any quantifiable level.
If you want to make the prostate cancer risk comparison truly apples-to-apples, just do the math. We’re talking about risk in a 2-hour window. Life expectancy for males in the US is roughly 78.5 years. That’s 28,652.5 days not counting leap year extras, and with 19 of those, it’s 28,671.5. That’s 688,116 hours. So, for a 2-hour window, divide by two and the comparison is:
Risk of getting CoViD on a plane – 1:4,300
Risk of getting colon cancer – 1:344,058
I know that math isn’t right, but that’s a more accurate numerical depiction of the true risk than comparing a 2hr risk to a lifetime risk.
Also, the calculated risk of 1:4,300 includes the chances that nobody on board has CoViD to begin with. I’m more interested in the odds of transmission if there is an infectious person on board, at least until a reliable and rapid test is broadly deployed that can screen passengers in real-time without causing massive delays.
Finally, your link to the Australian “study” is just a list of flights with confirmed CoViD positive passengers. I couldn’t find a link on that page to the contact tracing data (the one link “Contact tracing” is a login to some secured data). Can you provide the link to the contact tracing data, or study where they discuss having found no secondary cases from the list of confirmed cases on flights?
This Covid-19 shows that jungle mentality works. If you want to care for yourself, avoid planes, trains, and restaurants. Of course, if everyone did that, United and McDonalds would go bankrupt since each flight and restaurant would be completely empty. On the other hand, my prime duty is to my family and myself, not Scott Kirby of United Airlines or others like him.
If there were strict lockdown behavior for 3-4 weeks, say April 1 to April 30, Covid-19 would be minimal. Of course, it is impossible to convince 100% of people.
I still say an ounce of prevention won’t hurt as bad as the poundful of headaches when you get diagnosed with COVID. Mask mandates are worth the hassle.
This is a modeling study, not even remotely clinical in nature. It makes some amazing assumptions. It’s basically worthless. Also, the reason it’s not peer reviewed is not bc it was just released. Under normal circumstances, the peer review process would occur before any release
@MaKr – Which assumptions do you object to? Personally, I think the modeler should have used actual mask failure rates or mis-use (dropping the contraction odds lower) instead of assuming they would fail, and it should have been adjusted for average occupancy on a flight (making it far lower than even the 1:7700 rate.)
The study was “pre-released” which as a layman, I interpreted as before peers had a chance to review it. You mention “normal circumstances” but it makes sense to get the information out as soon as possible given these are not normal circumstances. I do cite that it was not peer-reviewed twice and also cite another study that corroborates the same as conducted on another continent halfway across the world so I would assume that is fairly independent.
Dear all
I’ve been flying once a week since pandemic started in Feb, in my personal opinion, flying is safer than those that doing protest and looting
Thanks
I generally think that flying itself is safer than most people believe (mainly due to air filtration), but your “comparitive” odds really need to be removed or restated. Comparing two things without normalizing for exposure ( 2 hours of flying time vs a lifetime ) shows either such a clear intent to deceive or an inability to understand numbers that it undermines the entire argument.
Also, I don’t find those numbers as reassuring as you seem to. Say the average frequent flyer flies 100,000 miles a year (enough to earn top tier status). Thats about 200 hours on planes. At 1:7,700 for 2 hours of flying, that means a person going back to a “normal” frequent travel schedule would have a 1.3% chance of catching Covid on a flight within a year, even with blocked middle seats on all those flights. That’s not great! And that doesn’t even include the increased risk of sitting around indoors in the airport on layovers.
(I’m also curious whether the study assumes people stay masked up properly the whole flight, or makes allowances for when people are “eating” or “drinking” and remove their masks.)
1:4300 without open middles vs 1:7700
So Airlines can cut risk BY HALF by blocking middles. United, American,Air Canada ARE YOU LISTENING, because the media and your customers are.
No known transmission on planes YET. Tell that to the hundreds of flight attendants, pilots, TSA workers, and Air Traffic Controllers who have contracted covid
Just be a lucky coincidence that a superspreader hasn’t flown on a packed seat, with middles full, and with people crowded during boarding and deplaning. So just wait.
If church congregagion or family event can have a superspreader, so can a boarding gate , tsa line, or plane.
.
As far as air filtering and change out. As the altitude increases the outflow valves modulate closed to maintain a 8.7 psi pressure inside the cabin. Air exchange is significantly reduced and this is to hold the cabin pressure over normal leaks and bleeds. It also burns more fuel to exchange more compressed air. Designers minimize the exchange on all newer models. The cabins have recirculation fans. They flow thru a heppa filter to remove dust and pollen. They don’t trap viruses. The filters are changed at heavy check and are quite filthy.
The positive thing about cabin air at altitude is that it is extremely dry. 1-2 % humidity. Viruses generally don’t survive this. Bad thing is your mucuos membrane that is your filter also dries out.
All the cabin cleaning is mostly BS. Some stations deep clean but not every leg.
I view traveling by air as posing similar risks to being exposed to crowds several times. When shopping for groceries, I see two phases of risk, general shopping and check out. When flying on a trip, I see potentially more phases of risk. Assuming a family member picks you up departing and arriving at the origin, I see potential phases of risk including check in, general airport interaction, security, flight, public restroom or lavatory, taxi or bus, hotel. Maybe 8-10 times more risky than a trip to the store for a disease with no cure.
In addition, I see a flight as a violation of social distancing practices. 6 feet is a minimum according to some tests but that some masks did not slow the flow of respiratory droplets for 18 feet. No mask and I think it’s like 30 feet. So 18 feet could mean 30 people. So it would be similar to eating in a small restaurant packed with customers. Not guaranteed fatal by far but increased risk compared to some activities on land less than others. I would guess that going to a church with people singing or a large demonstration with people yelling is higher risk but going to two stores to shop is a lower risk than flying. However, with flying, there’s no escape. If a passenger is coughing, there could be limited opportunities to move. In 2010, I caught someone’s bad cold from a coughing woman passenger even though I tried to turn my head away.
I have been afraid of germs my whole life. I’m the guy who, before the pandemic, carried hand sanitizer everywhere, washed my hands 10x a day, and brought the alcohol wipes on the plane to sanitize everything. It wasn’t easy since I’m a frequent business traveler.
Nevertheless, I am actually LESS bothered by covid than I was before. Everyone is wearing masks, the airlines are better cleaning planes now.
The simple fact is that every activity we do carries a risk. When I fly, there is a risk I will get covid, or some other virus, or that the plane will crash, or that a lifetime of flying will give me a high enough dose of radiation to cause cancer when I’m 70. When I drive, there is a risk that I will crash. When I eat, there is a risk I will get food poisoning. When I sit in front of my computer and work all day, there is a chance I will get carpal tunnel syndrome, or eye damage. When I have sex, I could catch a number of unpleasant diseases.
I realized long ago that there is always the possibility of getting sick while traveling. I accept it. I’ll do everything I can to avoid it of course, but ultimately the risk is acceptable, and not great enough to stop me from flying.
Let’s all be like Joe. Best comment I have read since March on any site.
The service reductions make flying unpleasant. I’m not flying because of fear of COVID. I’m not flying because the airlines have made the experience unpleasant.