Aircraft cabins do not help spread infectious diseases, says report

Monday, June 16, 2008, 12:46 by Aviation Correspondent

It is only natural for one to assume that being inside an aircraft full of people could be an easy way to catch an infectious disease. But that assumption is wrong since the quality and quantity of filtered air inside the cabin of a modern aircraft is in fact far better than in other crowded places, a survey of data by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has revealed.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is an operationally independent body within the Australian Government’s Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. It is also Australia’s prime agency for investigations into transport safety.

There have been cases of infectious diseases being transmitted in-flight, but the report says that those transmissions were probably caused by crowding in a confined space and not because of cabin conditions.

The health of a passenger is put at risk only when circulation and filtration systems do not work properly, the study said, and suggested that actually airports do offer more chances for the spread of infection than do aircraft.

The ATSB admitted that the increase in international air travel has enhanced the risk of infectious diseases spreading globally, and urged the aviation industry to play a role in dealing with that risk.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said “it conducted the study because of public concern about whether, or to what extent, aircraft cabins increased risk of transmission of infectious disease, and also reviewed current literature on the potential risk.”

The report concluded: “Despite the popular view that the risk of contracting an infectious disease during air travel is high, the available evidence suggests otherwise. Many passengers might be concerned that the high recirculation rates of cabin air on modern aircraft poses a particular risk for infection. However, outside air entering an aircraft cabin at altitude is essentially sterile, and the high airflow rates, laminar airflow pattern and frequent air exchanges of an aircraft cabin ventilation system minimises the spread of infection on board aircraft.”

The study came across the fact that filtration systems on modern aircraft should in fact remove the possibility of the transmission of infection.

Taking into account the fact that such a large number of flights are occurring each day across the world, reported cases of transmission of infection in an aircraft cabin have happened relatively infrequently, the report said, adding: “The evidence suggests that a passenger’s health is not greatly at risk through air travel and widespread infections are unlikely.”

And, even when transmission of an infectious disease was reported to have occurred in an aircraft cabin, the transmission of infection was caused owing to close contact with an infected passenger. “This fact suggests that the risk of transmission within an aircraft cabin is no greater than in other crowded and confined spaces, provided circulation and filtration systems are working properly,” the report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau stressed.

It also brought to light the fact that though the increase in international air travel could facilitate the spread of an influenza pandemic in future, the aviation industry would be playing a critical role in easing the impact of such a pandemic.

“Australia,” the report promised, “will prevent or minimise the spread of an emerging pandemic through border control measures and also possibly through travel restrictions.”

However, the report warns passengers that “though the overall risk of transmission of infection in an aircraft cabin is low, passengers need to give sufficient thought to their fitness to fly –not only for their own health but also for that of the other passengers who will be travelling along with them.”

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau recommended in the report that information to help passengers make “more responsible decisions” on whether or not to travel could be given more prominence.

Tagged with: ,

3 Comments

  1. sam said on Monday, July 7, 2008, 16:19

    I don’t believe this article at all. Right now, I’m sitting at home, recovering from a massive respiratory and ear infection. 7 days ago, I boarded a flight in New York City in perfect health. 7 hours later, I got off the flight in Los Angeles with a raging virus. This happens to me EVERY TIME I fly a night plane. My guess is that the plane has been used several times in one day, and no one cleans out the air filters or installs fresh air tanks until the end of the day. I’ve now promised myself that I will avoid all evening domestic flights.

  2. dsw said on Sunday, October 5, 2008, 9:52

    I often suffer a sore throat, a cold, headaches, fever or flu a few days after flying and I know I am not alone. Various studies have identified an increased risk of respiratory symptoms among airline crew in passenger aircraft, as well as cases of in-flight transmission of infectious diseases, such as TB, among passengers sitting up to several rows away from the infection source.

    Apparently, it is not the recirculation of air that causes the spread of disease in aircraft. Rather it is more likely the direct transmission of disease between persons even up to several rows apart, either through air transmission or mutual contacts. Reasons for trasnsmission by the air route include the following.:The diversity of sources and lack of immunity to the various pathogen exposures encountered in aircraft with the intermixing of persons from different population centers and continents is uniquely high for air travel in comparison with other venues such as theaters or classrooms where the occupants come from one geographic region. The filtered air supply rate to aircraft passengers is low (e.g.1/6th that provided to office workers). The low relative humidty typical of aircraft air favors the transmission of certain pathogens including the influenza A virus. The tight quarters in aircraft creates higher dose for any expsoure time due to the relatively small air buffering zoneper passenger versus less cramped quarters (e.g. a classroom typically has a 10 times larger air buffering zone per person than a commerical aircraft passenger).

  3. Bil said on Sunday, May 10, 2009, 8:39

    Please explain how a survey of (only the ones you can find), is going to satisfy the typical flyer that the air is safe to breath. OK, Lets look at the mechanicsics of aircraft circulation:

    1: Air on board an aircraft is recirculated. (Yes? No?)(Hint: Above 12,00 ft, air must be supplied to you)
    2: The filters the aircraft industriy uses, ARE NOT BIOLOGICAL FILTERS!!!!!

    3: Now, please explain to me how a man or woman can board an airplaine with a contagious sickness, and will not give it to other people.

    4: It don’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you travel by airplane, you are exposing yourself to the disease carried by other passengers, esppecially if its transmitted by breating the same air.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.