31–40 of 298 posts
If I understand this correctly, could wearing nose clips and only mouth breathing be an effective strategy to reduce impact?
That seems like the hypothesis they suggest. Interesting implications.
Not a biologist, but reading the paper, the chain of reasoning appears to be summarized in this section: > Taken together, the neuroinvasive propensity has been demonstrated as a common feature of CoVs. In light of the high similarity between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV2, it is quite likely that SARS-CoV-2 also possesses a similar potential. Based on an epidemiological survey on COVID-19, the median time from the first sym…
> According to the complaints of a survivor, the medical graduate student (24 years old) from Wuhan University, she must stay awake and breathe consciously and actively during the intensive care. She said that if she fell asleep, she might die because she had lost her natural breath.
Would that explain people collapsing suddenly on the streets as seen in Wuhan and Iran?
From the paper: > If the neuroinvasion of SARS-CoV-2 does take a part in the development of respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients, the precaution with masks will absolutely be the most effective measure to protect against the possible entry of the virus into the CNS. It may also be expected that the symptoms of the patients infected via facal-oral or conjunctival route will be lighter than those infected intranasa…
This suggests an advantage to purposeful infection by oral/eye rather than accidental by intranasal. It'll be interesting to see what the case fatality rate is when segmented by infection route.
From the paper: > If the neuroinvasion of SARS-CoV-2 does take a part in the development of respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients, the precaution with masks will absolutely be the most effective measure to protect against the possible entry of the virus into the CNS. It may also be expected that the symptoms of the patients infected via facal-oral or conjunctival route will be lighter than those infected intranasa…
Yes, only a N95 or better mask would protect you from incoming, as opposed to outgoing, viruses, and these masks are both impractical for everyday wear and need to be conserved for public health users.
It's almost a moot point right now though because they're sold out pretty much everywhere.
Warm and wet.
If it did turn out this virus is neuroinvasive and that is what causes acute respiratory problems, how would this be prevented/mitigated/treated, theoretically?
This may sound very stupid, but... As a sort of "vaccine", would it make sense to have people intentionally infected orally so they build up antibodies before it has a chance to spread to their brain?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, only a N95 or better mask would protect you from incoming, as opposed to outgoing, viruses, and these masks are both impractical for everyday wear and need to be conserved for public health users.
I think there's a legitimate question here. Intuitively, if a non-N95 mask only stops 25% or 50% of incoming viruses, that still seems helpful? It's worth noting that in countries where wearing masks is normalized, making sure the general public can get some is a top priority.
At the moment because of the misinformation people wearing masks are being mocked and chided in public and its really unhelpful. Especially since there are immune compromised individuals and individuals with other conditions that really need to take every precaution they can, including that 10% reduction a surgical mask may give them.
The link should be changed to the publisher‘s page where the pdf is linked. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.25728
It's important to see the NIH summary though. Gives the study credibility.