New York has been hit hard by the current swine flu outbreak, and many schools in NY have been forced to close. A story in the New York Times today (As Schools Close Because of Flu, No Guidance on How to Rein It In, NYT 5/19/09) adds to the confusion regarding halting the spread of influenza. The article minimizes the potential importance of school disinfecting – the use of germ-killing solutions on inanimate surfaces.
Schools are well known as amplifiers of influenza and other community-wide infections, explaining why school closures are included in pandemic planning by the CDC and the WHO. While it is never absolutely clear in any particular outbreak what percentage of influenza cases in a school are spread directly person-to-person rather than by indirect contact with contaminated surfaces, both routes likely have a role. The ability of flu viruses, as well as other viral and bacterial contagions, to persist in infectious form on inanimate objects has been proven repeatedly. To state, as the article did, that “disinfecting closed schools is pointless” ignores the scientific reality that viruses persist on surfaces and that the greater the quantity of viruses, and the greater the number of contaminated surfaces, the greater the risk of acquiring an infection from an inanimate object.
Disinfecting reduces the surface viral “load”, and reduces the number of infected surfaces. Until evidence shows that spread of influenza from surfaces to people doesn’t occur, surfaces in highly trafficked sites in schools should be disinfected. This does not mean that schools must be closed to disinfect, nor does it mean that hand washing and alcohol hand sanitizers aren’t necessary. We should use all the weapons available to us when influenza enters our schools to prevent its further spread to those in the school building and those outside in the community; disinfecting is not “just for show”, as one of the experts says in the article.