The Science of a Sneeze
Dr. John Overholt • May 2, 2014
Gesundheit, Fellow Science Geeks!
I love science: chemistry, physics, engineering, math. It’s a big reason I became a doctor. So when scientists at Massachusetts Institute of Technology published a paper in the Journal of Fluid Mechanics on sneezing, I got pretty excited. How nerdy is that? Anyway, regardless of your level of nerd-cred, the article had some important and interesting new findings — and it has a high-speed video of a sneeze.
What you’re seeing there is not just a simple sneeze, it’s a multiphase turbulent buoyant cloud. That means that when you sneeze, the gasses you emit mix with the surrounding air (“multiphase”) in a violent, roiling fashion (“turbulent”) that results in a floating (“buoyant”) cloud. We used to think that the distance a germ could travel in a sneeze was limited to the distance the large droplet particles could travel, essentially the spray that you can see and feel from a sneeze. We also thought that larger particles traveled the farthest due to their greater momentum. The new gas cloud model turns that understanding on its ear. It tells us that the smaller particles travel the farthest because the cloud keeps them suspended in the air while the larger particles fall out. In fact, these small particles can travel five to 200 times farther than we previously thought! Some very small particles even had the potential to reach air ventilation intakes that could then circulate them elsewhere in an indoor environment.
In practical terms, this might change the way ventilation systems are designed, especially for higher risk locales like hospitals, schools and airplanes. Better air systems with less germ transmission could result in real gains in public health: fewer cases of hospital-acquired pneumonia, fewer influenza outbreaks in schools, and less anxiety about the guy three rows behind you on the plane coughing his head off. For now, though, the CDC still recommends that we sneeze into our elbow and wash our hands after sneezing — very good recommendations.
If you want to dig a little deeper and read about it from the people who really know what they are talking about, try this press release from MIT. If you read it, let me know what you think, and I'll put your official nerd certificate in the mail.
You might also like
Allergic Contact Dermatitis from Gel Nail Polish (HEMA / Methacrylates) What is happening? The itching, swelling around the cuticles, small blisters, and peeling skin are signs of allergic contact dermatitis — an allergic reaction caused by chemicals in gel nail polish called (meth)acrylates. The most common culprit is a chemical called HEMA (2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate). Why did this happen after months of use? This type of allergy is a delayed immune reaction. The body needs repeated exposures — often over many months — before the immune system becomes sensitized. This is why the product may have seemed perfectly fine at first. Why are home kits riskier? Gel nail polish must be fully "cured" (hardened) under a UV or LED lamp. When the polish is fully cured, the chemicals become locked into a solid polymer and are no longer irritating. The problem occurs when the polish is not fully cured — leftover uncured chemical monomers sit on the skin and trigger the allergic reaction. Home kits are riskier because: The lamp may be underpowered or mismatched to the polish formula Layers may be applied too thickly for the lamp to cure completely Curing times may be too short Technique without professional training increases skin contact If you're having an allergic reaction to at-home gel nail kits, discontinue use and review your products and technique to ensure quality ingredients, sufficient curing times, and properly powered lamps.
Summer is in full swing! Learn why some seasonal activities can cause flare-ups and how you can protect your lungs while still enjoying the festivities.
If you spend any time browsing the internet or social media, you’ve likely seen advertisements for mail-in allergy kits. They promise to test for hundreds of food intolerances and environmental sensitivities using just a few strands of your hair or a quick saliva swab. It sounds incredibly convenient, painless, and comprehensive. But if it sounds like a gimmick, it probably is. While these mail-in tests are heavily marketed, they often lack scientific backing and can leave patients feeling more confused than comforted. The Science of Allergy Testing. What Are We Looking For? To understand why hair and saliva tests don't work, we have to look at how the immune system reacts to allergens. When you have a true allergy, your body produces a very specific type of antibody called IgE (Immunoglobulin E) . These antibodies bind to mast cells (allergy cells), which are on high alert to protect you from perceived invaders like pollen, dust mites, or specific food proteins. The fundamental flaw with mail-in hair and saliva kits comes down to basic biology: Wrong Locations: Mast cells and IgE antibodies are not traditionally found in your hair follicles or saliva. Unreliable Results: Because these testing methods are looking in the wrong place, they are highly unstandardized and unvalidated. You are highly likely to get a flood of false positives or false negatives that are impossible to interpret accurately. What the Experts Say: Major medical organizations strongly advise against these methods. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) explicitly recommends against using hair analysis for food allergy evaluations due to a lack of diagnostic value. Furthermore, the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) and the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (ACAAI) have issued strong practice guidelines stating that hair analysis should not be used to evaluate food allergies. The Big Misconception: IgE vs. IgG Many mail-in companies charge anywhere from $150 to upwards of $600 for "sensitivity" panels. When patients produce these multi-page reports, the testing is almost always checking for IgG (Immunoglobulin G) antibodies, not IgE. There is a massive difference between the two:
