this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
850 points (96.0% liked)
memes
10712 readers
2938 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The highlighted section of that link reads as follows:
The article doesn't indicate whether the total bacteria contained in the now larger and more concentrated droplets is thought to be comparable to that contained in the full spray of open-lid droplets, which means a precise comparison isn't available, so technically I guess it could go either way. However, common sense tells us that many of those microorganisms will either get stuck to the underside of the lid or fall back into the water, so it seems nearly impossible that closed-lid flushing could spray 100% of the microorganisms that open-lid flushing does, right? So if the best (seemingly unlikely) scenario for open-lid flushing is that maybe it only sprays the exact same number of farticles into the air, then what's the appeal?