A novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and has since caused a global pandemic. A study compared the aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 with that of SARS-CoV-1, the most closely related human coronavirus. The study evaluated the stability of both viruses in aerosols and on various surfaces, using a Bayesian regression model. SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols for up to 3 hours, with a reduction in infectious titer similar to that of SARS-CoV-1. On surfaces, SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, with viable virus detected up to 72 hours on plastic and stainless steel. However, the virus titer was greatly reduced over time. The stability kinetics of SARS-CoV-1 were similar to those of SARS-CoV-2. The half-lives of both viruses were similar in aerosols and on copper, but SARS-CoV-2 had a longer half-life on cardboard than SARS-CoV-1. The stability of SARS-CoV-2 was similar to that of SARS-CoV-1 under the experimental conditions tested. This suggests that differences in the epidemiologic characteristics of these viruses likely arise from other factors, such as high viral loads in the upper respiratory tract and the potential for asymptomatic transmission. The study indicates that aerosol and fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is plausible, as the virus can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days. These findings are similar to those observed with SARS-CoV-1, where these forms of transmission were associated with nosocomial spread and super-spreading events. The study provides important information for pandemic mitigation efforts. The research was conducted by a team of scientists from various institutions, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Princeton University, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The findings are supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the National Science Foundation. The study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on March 17, 2020.A novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and has since caused a global pandemic. A study compared the aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 with that of SARS-CoV-1, the most closely related human coronavirus. The study evaluated the stability of both viruses in aerosols and on various surfaces, using a Bayesian regression model. SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols for up to 3 hours, with a reduction in infectious titer similar to that of SARS-CoV-1. On surfaces, SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, with viable virus detected up to 72 hours on plastic and stainless steel. However, the virus titer was greatly reduced over time. The stability kinetics of SARS-CoV-1 were similar to those of SARS-CoV-2. The half-lives of both viruses were similar in aerosols and on copper, but SARS-CoV-2 had a longer half-life on cardboard than SARS-CoV-1. The stability of SARS-CoV-2 was similar to that of SARS-CoV-1 under the experimental conditions tested. This suggests that differences in the epidemiologic characteristics of these viruses likely arise from other factors, such as high viral loads in the upper respiratory tract and the potential for asymptomatic transmission. The study indicates that aerosol and fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is plausible, as the virus can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days. These findings are similar to those observed with SARS-CoV-1, where these forms of transmission were associated with nosocomial spread and super-spreading events. The study provides important information for pandemic mitigation efforts. The research was conducted by a team of scientists from various institutions, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Princeton University, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The findings are supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the National Science Foundation. The study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on March 17, 2020.