Quantcast

One more reason to wear a mask: You'll get less sick from COVID-19

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

cwbullet

Obsessed with Rocketry
Staff member
Administrator
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Global Mod
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
25,393
Reaction score
3,357
Location
Glennville, GA
But, not in a huge crowd of screaming, chanting "Protesters" / Rioters / Domestic Terrorists, etc., right ?

Dave F.
That would be a risk that I would not want to be a part of.
 

Ez2cDave

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,786
Reaction score
1,013
Interestingly, earlier this year there was a BLM protest in the city. There was no massive spike in numbers due to that event, but people did wear a lot of masks and social distance.
"BLM protests" are a little different, here in the USA . . . Take a look at the cities of Portland & Seattle, for example. Perhaps, the Tear Gas, smoke from the burning cars, buildings, and chemical residue from the explosions have a therapeutic benefit against COVID-19 ?

Dave F.
 
Last edited:

Ez2cDave

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,786
Reaction score
1,013
Changed your mind?
Not at all, but my explanation would be very long, politically-incorrect, and highly politically-charged.

Unfortunately, I can't post my real thoughts openly on this Forum, without getting banned.

Dave F.
 

Ez2cDave

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,786
Reaction score
1,013
That would be a risk that I would not want to be a part of.
Not unless I were heavily-armed and "green-lighted" to shut it down, permanently . . . with or without Covid-19.

Dave F.
 

Marc_G

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
6,438
Reaction score
557
Location
Indianapolis Metro Area
Let's see here:

Side effect of wearing masks per @Ez2cDave (long term, not just popping into the store): "Mask mouth with possible dry mouth and increased cavities"
Side effect of people not wearing masks in public: COVID-19, weeks of horrible illness, long term health problems, blood clots, potential for hospitalization, intubation, and death.

Thanks to Dave's post I am (not joking here) being more mindful of mask mouth complications and paying more attention to dental hygiene with masking.

Still, I doubt that many of the 1000 deaths per day we are seeing with COVID-19 should have any significant portion of them relabeled "mask mouth."
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
8,636
Reaction score
900
Start at 11:08:

Roger Seheult, MD Board Certified in Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Disease, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine. Associate Professor at the University of California, Riverside School of Medicine


Masks Do More Than Protect Others During COVID-19: Reducing the Inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 to Protect the Wearer


Although asymptomatic infection can be problematic in terms of increasing spread, it can also be beneficial. Higher rates of asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 lead to higher rates of exposure, as was seen with antibody testing campaigns in Japan or the surveillance study in the pediatric hemodialysis unit in Indiana. Exposing society to SARSCoV-2 without the unacceptable consequences of severe illness could lead to greater community-level immunity and slow down spread as we await a vaccine.

Although universal public masking can certainly protect others, the “inoculum” theory argues for a major protective effect for the individual and will allow for the preservation of life, along with other COVID-19 control measures, as society re-opens. This perspective puts forth another advantage of population-level facial masking for pandemic control with SARS-CoV-2 based on an old but enduring theory regarding viral inoculum, clinical manifestations in the host, and protection.


Surgical mask partition reduces the risk of non-contact transmission in a golden Syrian hamster model for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)


Results

Non-contact transmission was found in 66.7% (10/15) of exposed naïve hamsters. Surgical mask partition for challenged index or naïve hamsters significantly reduced transmission to 25% (6/24, P=0.018). Surgical mask partition for challenged index hamsters significantly reduced transmission to only 16.7% (2/12, P=0.019) of exposed naïve hamsters. Unlike the severe COVID-19 manifestations of challenged hamsters, infected naïve hamsters had lower clinical scores, milder histopathological changes, and lower viral nucleocapsid antigen expression in respiratory tract tissues.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 could be transmitted by respiratory droplets or airborne droplet nuclei in the hamster model. Such transmission could be reduced by surgical mask usage, especially when masks were worn by infected individuals.
 

BABAR

Builds Rockets for NASA
TRF Lifetime Supporter
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
6,293
Reaction score
1,564
Start at 11:08:

Roger Seheult, MD Board Certified in Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Disease, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine. Associate Professor at the University of California, Riverside School of Medicine


Masks Do More Than Protect Others During COVID-19: Reducing the Inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 to Protect the Wearer


Although asymptomatic infection can be problematic in terms of increasing spread, it can also be beneficial. Higher rates of asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 lead to higher rates of exposure, as was seen with antibody testing campaigns in Japan or the surveillance study in the pediatric hemodialysis unit in Indiana. Exposing society to SARSCoV-2 without the unacceptable consequences of severe illness could lead to greater community-level immunity and slow down spread as we await a vaccine.

Although universal public masking can certainly protect others, the “inoculum” theory argues for a major protective effect for the individual and will allow for the preservation of life, along with other COVID-19 control measures, as society re-opens. This perspective puts forth another advantage of population-level facial masking for pandemic control with SARS-CoV-2 based on an old but enduring theory regarding viral inoculum, clinical manifestations in the host, and protection.


Surgical mask partition reduces the risk of non-contact transmission in a golden Syrian hamster model for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)


Results

Non-contact transmission was found in 66.7% (10/15) of exposed naïve hamsters. Surgical mask partition for challenged index or naïve hamsters significantly reduced transmission to 25% (6/24, P=0.018). Surgical mask partition for challenged index hamsters significantly reduced transmission to only 16.7% (2/12, P=0.019) of exposed naïve hamsters. Unlike the severe COVID-19 manifestations of challenged hamsters, infected naïve hamsters had lower clinical scores, milder histopathological changes, and lower viral nucleocapsid antigen expression in respiratory tract tissues.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 could be transmitted by respiratory droplets or airborne droplet nuclei in the hamster model. Such transmission could be reduced by surgical mask usage, especially when masks were worn by infected individuals.
I would like to see how they kept those little masks on the hamsters
 

rklapp

NAR# 109557
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
663
Reaction score
424
Location
Oahu, Hawaii
I would like to see how they kept those little masks on the hamsters
That’s what Trevor Noah said. They put the mask over the cage but missed the social media opportunity to put masks on their mice faces. For a bunch of virologists, they know **** about going viral.
 

cwbullet

Obsessed with Rocketry
Staff member
Administrator
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Global Mod
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
25,393
Reaction score
3,357
Location
Glennville, GA
Start at 11:08:

Roger Seheult, MD Board Certified in Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Disease, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine. Associate Professor at the University of California, Riverside School of Medicine


Masks Do More Than Protect Others During COVID-19: Reducing the Inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 to Protect the Wearer


Although asymptomatic infection can be problematic in terms of increasing spread, it can also be beneficial. Higher rates of asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 lead to higher rates of exposure, as was seen with antibody testing campaigns in Japan or the surveillance study in the pediatric hemodialysis unit in Indiana. Exposing society to SARSCoV-2 without the unacceptable consequences of severe illness could lead to greater community-level immunity and slow down spread as we await a vaccine.

Although universal public masking can certainly protect others, the “inoculum” theory argues for a major protective effect for the individual and will allow for the preservation of life, along with other COVID-19 control measures, as society re-opens. This perspective puts forth another advantage of population-level facial masking for pandemic control with SARS-CoV-2 based on an old but enduring theory regarding viral inoculum, clinical manifestations in the host, and protection.


Surgical mask partition reduces the risk of non-contact transmission in a golden Syrian hamster model for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)


Results

Non-contact transmission was found in 66.7% (10/15) of exposed naïve hamsters. Surgical mask partition for challenged index or naïve hamsters significantly reduced transmission to 25% (6/24, P=0.018). Surgical mask partition for challenged index hamsters significantly reduced transmission to only 16.7% (2/12, P=0.019) of exposed naïve hamsters. Unlike the severe COVID-19 manifestations of challenged hamsters, infected naïve hamsters had lower clinical scores, milder histopathological changes, and lower viral nucleocapsid antigen expression in respiratory tract tissues.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 could be transmitted by respiratory droplets or airborne droplet nuclei in the hamster model. Such transmission could be reduced by surgical mask usage, especially when masks were worn by infected individuals.
I don't need a clinical try to know masks' work, but I appreciate the people who did it. It is common sense. If you run something through cloth and that something is sticky, some of it will stick to the cloth.
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
8,636
Reaction score
900
Scientists tested 14 types of masks: Here's what worked and what didn't
All masks aren't created equal, but most face covers will protect you.


Ignore the first image which is simply a photo of all mask types tested:

The 14 face masks tested in Duke University study, ranked from best to worst
August 11, 2020


Study PDF:

 

rklapp

NAR# 109557
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
663
Reaction score
424
Location
Oahu, Hawaii
Scientists tested 14 types of masks: Here's what worked and what didn't
All masks aren't created equal, but most face covers will protect you.


Ignore the first image which is simply a photo of all mask types tested:

The 14 face masks tested in Duke University study, ranked from best to worst
August 11, 2020


Study PDF:

I’m surprised the N95 valved was #7.

I have a fit testing kit and tried it on my son with a N95 valved. It worked but he could smell the test odor, so about 95% effective as advertised.
 

aerostadt

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
3,167
Reaction score
186
Location
Brigham City, UT
I've been wearing the surgical mask a lot. I didn't realize it was so effective. I was about to throw it away. Since the mask help, why not wear them and get rid of this stunted economy and a country tied up in knots with such a simple measure. I only wear it when I run into the store and out on a simple errand. It only takes a few minutes of wear time. How many more months are we going to be tied up in knots?
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
8,636
Reaction score
900
I’m surprised the N95 valved was #7.

I have a fit testing kit and tried it on my son with a N95 valved. It worked but he could smell the test odor, so about 95% effective as advertised.
It was #7 because the point of the test was to measure the emission of droplets from the wearer and the exhalation valve is counter to the purpose of filtering them out.
 

rklapp

NAR# 109557
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
663
Reaction score
424
Location
Oahu, Hawaii
I’m surprised the N95 valved was #7.
It was #7 because the point of the test was to measure the emission of droplets from the wearer and the exhalation valve is counter to the purpose of filtering them out.
Wait a minute, the valve closes when you breathe in forcing the air through the same filter as the unvalved N95. If you sneezed, the valve would allow some particles from escaping and going on someone else, just not as much as without a face-covering.
 
Last edited:

10fttall

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
839
Reaction score
7
I have no medical education, so going back to the OP...Is there any rational explanation for this theory. To me it sounds suspect. I can see if one were to get less particles, there might be a reduced chance of getting the virus AT ALL. As in, the body could just fight off those several, no problem. However, if one is exposed to very little or a whole lot of the virus, and develops the virus, there is an exponential increase in the virus throughout the body. It causes whatever symptoms it causes, and then is over. Now, even mild cases seem to me, would take a significant foothold and massive growth of the virus compared to the original minute aerosol particle. How would this be any different than receiving a bigger amount to start with? If you've got enough to be a mild case, to me it seems like it's getting along plenty well, and could "get you" further.

To my uneducated view, it seems like a much better answer is some underlying factor in the patients already, or a more benign strain.
 

OverTheTop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
4,158
Reaction score
1,369
Location
Melbourne Australia
The dose of the virus makes a big difference to the final outcome, in general terms. A small dose will be dealt with by the innate response quite quickly, and the second response system will get going and deal quite well with the lower levels.

With a larger initial dose the body has more trouble dealing with the load and the exponential growth is more progressed. Beyond a certain point it is replicating quickly and the body's immune system has trouble keeping up.

There is conjecture that some of the cases with worse outcome are due to higher initial doses of the virus when contracted.
 

plugger

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
459
Reaction score
156
But, not in a huge crowd of screaming, chanting "Protesters" / Rioters / Domestic Terrorists, etc., right ?

Dave F.
Lol. You can't have antifa without a bunch of fa running around, amirite?
 

Kelly

Usually remembers to get the pointy end up
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
324
Reaction score
192
Location
Oregon
However, if one is exposed to very little or a whole lot of the virus, and develops the virus, there is an exponential increase in the virus throughout the body. It causes whatever symptoms it causes, and then is over.
You have to remember that as soon as there is one virus in the body, the body starts mounting its defense. At the same time the virus is multiplying, so are your defenses. If you get a huge initial load, it overwhelms the body, and it is quite some some (if at all!) before the body is able to build up a defense and fight it off. With a small initial load, your body gets an early start, and can keep the disease at bay.
 

BABAR

Builds Rockets for NASA
TRF Lifetime Supporter
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
6,293
Reaction score
1,564
I have no medical education, so going back to the OP...Is there any rational explanation for this theory. To me it sounds suspect. I can see if one were to get less particles, there might be a reduced chance of getting the virus AT ALL. As in, the body could just fight off those several, no problem. However, if one is exposed to very little or a whole lot of the virus, and develops the virus, there is an exponential increase in the virus throughout the body. It causes whatever symptoms it causes, and then is over. Now, even mild cases seem to me, would take a significant foothold and massive growth of the virus compared to the original minute aerosol particle. How would this be any different than receiving a bigger amount to start with? If you've got enough to be a mild case, to me it seems like it's getting along plenty well, and could "get you" further.

To my uneducated view, it seems like a much better answer is some underlying factor in the patients already, or a more benign strain.
I am a physician and initially thought the same thing. But one of the first Chinese fatalities was a 33 year old ophthalmologist, otherwise healthy, not obese, who examined a patient with acute glaucoma who unfortunately ALSO had Covid. Standard ophthalmology exam has the doctor right “in your face” for a prolonged period, especially if he did a scope and a slitlamp exam. So he probably got a massive dose of live virus. Might explain why an otherwise healthy young man died of the disease. He was also a “whistleblower “ warning of the disease early on.

So (as @Kelly said) maybe a small dose is enough to get an initial immune response quickly enough to prevent a severe infection, thus initial infection is Asymptomatic or mild, while big doses multiply fast enough to overwhelm the system before it can mount a successful immune response.

What we DON’T know is if the LONGEVITY of the immune response is related to the severity of the infection (?mild infection provides little or no long term immunity compared to a severe infection), in fact we don’t have enough data yet to know how long ANY immune response will be effective at preventing a second infection. Interestingly, some of the studies on the vaccines are demonstrating an INITIAL higher immune response to the vaccine than from actual infection, which surprises me but certainly is encouraging. We can only keep masking, keep social distancing, wash our hands a lot, and keep hoping and praying.

 

RainierWolfcastle

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 24, 2017
Messages
95
Reaction score
39
Dental Problems, “Mask Mouth” Linked to Consistent Use of Face Masks

https://www.thepatriotbrief.com/dental-problems-mask-mouth-linked-to-consistent-use-of-face-masks

<snip quoted article>
It seems they left out additional comments by the dentist 'quoted' (statements were used, but not attributed) that show up in other news sources:

While masks are not negotiable given the times, Sclafani says there are things wearers can do to avoid their grossest side effect: drink more water, cut down on caffeine, snag a humidifier (to “help moisten the air”), use an alcohol-free mouthwash, scrape your tongue and don’t smoke.

And If all else fails? “Just breathe through your nose!”


I guess it just depends if you think drinking more water and breathing through your nose is an unbearable burden in order to reduce the spread of the virus?
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
8,636
Reaction score
900
Wait a minute, the valve closes when you breathe in forcing the air through the same filter as the unvalved N95. If you sneezed, the valve would allow some particles from escaping and going on someone else, just not as much as without a face-covering.
Once again, the masks were being tested for their effectiveness in preventing the release of droplets. With a valved N95, exhalation is not filtered. You protect yourself, but emit droplets to potentially infect others and not just through respiration, but from the surface contamination caused by settled droplets. The point is to avoid as much as possible the emission of the droplets in the first place thereby providing as much protection as possible for others no matter what type of mask they might be wearing.
 

rklapp

NAR# 109557
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
663
Reaction score
424
Location
Oahu, Hawaii
Once again, the masks were being tested for their effectiveness in preventing the release of droplets. With a valved N95, exhalation is not filtered. You protect yourself, but emit droplets to potentially infect others and not just through respiration, but from the surface contamination caused by settled droplets. The point is to avoid as much as possible the emission of the droplets in the first place thereby providing as much protection as possible for others no matter what type of mask they might be wearing.
Understood. I think the mask and valve acts as a baffle and will contain most if not all the particles. Otherwise our plastic parachutes are toast.
 

hobie1dog

Hi-Fi Nut
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
3,104
Reaction score
154
Location
Cornelius, NC
Your eyes are a direct link to the inside of your body, that's where you are going to get the virus, and only medical workers have eye protection.
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
8,636
Reaction score
900
Your eyes are a direct link to the inside of your body, that's where you are going to get the virus, and only medical workers have eye protection.
Correct about the eyes which is yet another reason to minimize droplet release via masks.

Common safety goggles with vents taped over with clear packing tape and dishwashing soap anti-fog treatment work in a pinch. An advantage is that some people tend stay the hell away from you because they either think YOU might be infected or to be nice because they think you might be particularly vulnerable for some reason. My hobbies allowed me to have several of these already on hand:

Neiko 53874A Protective Anti-Fog Safety Goggles with Wide-Vision, Extra Soft, Adjustable & Lightweight,Clear


APRIL 23, 2020
Key nose [and eye] cells identified as likely COVID-19 virus entry points


Two specific cell types in the nose have been identified as likely initial infection points for COVID-19 coronavirus. Scientists discovered that goblet and ciliated cells in the nose have high levels of the entry proteins that the COVID-19 virus uses to get into our cells.

It further shows that cells in the eye and some other organs also contain the viral-entry proteins. The study also predicts how a key entry protein is regulated with other immune system genes and reveals potential targets for the development of treatments to reduce transmission.

Dr. Martijn Nawijn, from the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands, said, on behalf of the HCA Lung Biological Network: "This is the first time these particular cells in the nose have been associated with COVID-19. While there are many factors that contribute to virus transmissibility, our findings are consistent with the rapid infection rates of the virus seen so far. The location of these cells on the surface of the inside of the nose make them highly accessible to the virus, and also may assist with transmission to other people."

The two key entry proteins ACE2 and TMPRSS2 were also found in cells in the cornea of the eye and in the lining of the intestine. This suggests another possible route of infection via the eye and tear ducts, and also revealed a potential for fecal-oral transmission.
 

rklapp

NAR# 109557
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
663
Reaction score
424
Location
Oahu, Hawaii
Understood. I think the mask and valve acts as a baffle and will contain most if not all the particles. Otherwise our plastic parachutes are toast.
Turns out CDC recommends not using N95 masks with exhalation valve.

Respirators with exhalation valves protect the wearer from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, but may not prevent the virus spreading from the wearer to others (that is, they may not be effective for source control). Until data are available to describe how effective respirators with exhalation valves are in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 from the wearer to others:

  • Wear a respirator without an exhalation valve when both source control and respiratory protection are required.
  • If only a respirator with an exhalation valve is available and source control is needed, cover the exhalation valve with a surgical mask, procedure mask, or a cloth face covering that does not interfere with the respirator fit.
 
Top