Live data from Hacker News

Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

nature.com

151–160 of 176 posts

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#151
post #150
post #74

Someone made an interesting point that we got rid of cholera by drinking cleaner water and that we'll get rid of Covid by breathing cleaner air.

Considering you’re exposed to water during limited times (and need to actually ingest it) but exposed to air 24/7 (or else you die) that doesn’t seem like a reasonable comparison. If someone standing in front of you sneezes, a filter in the HVAC isn’t doing anything to stop you from getting covid. I mean, isn’t airborne transmission still uncertain for Covid?

No post body was provided.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#153
post #74

Someone made an interesting point that we got rid of cholera by drinking cleaner water and that we'll get rid of Covid by breathing cleaner air.

No, we will not. The virus spreads when people are close and breathe. And then there are animal reservoirs.

This virus isn't going anywhere until we develop an actual vaccine that stops it. I, personally, bet on CRISPR-based or similar solution.

Filtering air will slow it down, but it cannot stop it.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1x 20x20 MERV-13+ MPR-2400+ HVAC air filter ($20) That's a MERV-13 filter, not a HEPA filter. HEPA filters 99%+ of small (0.3um) particles per pass. A MERV-13 filter only filters like 60% per pass IIRC. That means that a 1000 cu. feet of air through the HEPA filter will result in 990+ cu. feet of clean air. While the MERV-13 filter will only produce 600 cu. feet of clean air. -------- A MERV13 filter would be good…

note that phrase like "600ft³ of clean air" are misleading. filtration drops off rapidly with distance from the air purifier, so the fan would need to be quite oversized for a room to experience relatively even filtration. for most rooms, that wouldn't be comfortable, for both noise and draft reasons. i'm down with air purifiers for indoor particulate matter (i.e., air pollution), but they're not really going to make…

Yeah, that's what i dont get.. In germany they plan to filter air in classroom... Classroom are pretty big.. How big do they plan the fan to be?!?

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#155
post #137
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the data suggest that its not someone breathing on you in passing that's going to result in covid infection, but spending long periods with someone indoors in close proximity. Within a half hour in the massive grocery store? I would be shocked if you caught it. Drinking in someones living room, swapping stories within arms length, swapping spit flecks for 5 hours straight? Definitely going to spread everything yo…

What data are you referring to? The protests and marches last year seem to be hard to ignore example of things that should have had more spread by these standards.

Those were outdoors with plenty of room for viral particulate to disperse. there has been a lot written about this, its called the infectious dose which is the amount of virus particulate needed for someone to become ill with the virus. I recommend pubmed or google scholar if you want a deeper dive.

if you are having trouble visualizing how this works, imagine a perfume dispenser jetting out a fine mist, that's your covid positive person exhaling. In an enclosed small room, the concentration of that particulate mist is much higher than in a large room, and unable to disperse quickly without any ventilation. Over time, you will inhale more and more of this particulate in this room at this concentration, and you will hit the infectious dose level eventually. If you are outside, or in a larger or well ventilated room, concentration of the particulate is much smaller since its either dispersing into a greater volume of air or being removed from the area due to ventilation, and it might take you a long period of time to inhale enough particulate at this comparatively lower airborne concentration in order to become sick. Outside, even in a protest, the volume of air is so large in which to disperse particulate that the risk of getting an infectious dose is negligible even with someone yelling right next to you.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#156
post #133
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am so confused… how do they think covid spreads, then? Why should you wear a surgical at all, then?

The sign I saw at a hospital in Toronto said no fabric masks, only surgical. It’s probably about uniform coverage not overall efficiency, a compromise of most big central systems.

My corner flower shop has a sign saying surgical or FFP2, just like most shops I’ve seen in my area of Germany. If they can manage it, so should a hospital.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#157
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Early on in the pandemic, the Canadian IPAC (Infection Control and Prevention) establishment came down hard against theories of airborne COVID transmission, at first even going so far as to not recommend masking. Even now that the science of airborne transmission has been established, they're waging a rearguard battle to obfuscate/deny it and airborne protections such as better ventilation and masking. If you go to a…

> If you go to a Canadian hospital wearing an N95 these days there's a good chance they will insist you to take it off in favour of a "clean" surgical mask with gaps around the sides and nose. Wouldn't that just be because of protocol, ie. they don't know if you, a member of the public, actually have a legit N95 mask, or if you know how to correctly implement it, etc.

How do they know that one is not wearing a fake surgical mask then? The obvious conclusion is that parts of the medical establishment are still being dumbasses about masks, two years into the pandemic.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#158
post #129

Wouldn’t be a bad idea to start having air filters in confined spaces. Elevators, gyms, restaurants. Not saying it has to happen all at once, but it would help decrease most respiratory diseases from spreading.

So many public restrooms use some automated febreeze sprayer to deal with the feces particulate odor in the room. If they used actual HEPA they could actually cut down on the particulate and odors without having the bathroom smell like you are inside a scented candle, or an Abercrombie store. Ongoing costs would probably be similar, HEPA filters are cheap just like a can of febreeze.

HEPA filters do not remove odors. Bad smell is caused by extremely small particles that cannot be removed by HEPA filters. To remove odor, you will need other filters, such as an activated carbon filter. Some air purifiers come with both a HEPA filter and a filter to remove odors.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from extremely poor studies about long covid in kids: why?

Ending the pandemic is in everyone's interests, as it would help repair the economy. Kids would be included in that as the economy changes how adults are able to care for kids. Kids have been separated from their parents due to increased evictions, their parents may not be able to work which means less money for food/clothing/services/healthcare, their parents & extended family are dying, their education has been imp…

All of these are impacts of lockdowns, not the pandemic.

Re: Real-world data show that filters clean Covid-causing virus from air

#160
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because understanding how viruses spread is a solved art. None of this is "unknown."

In the same way that people are dumbfounded that natural immunity from having it is superior than the vaccine. It’s as if we all forgot how viruses work.

In terms of safety, vaccines are much better then getting COVID.

One of the big factors of "better protection" of immunity gained after recovering from the virus is survivor bias. In data about mortality after reinfection there are no people who died after getting it for the 1st time. This leaves only ones who had body strong enough to recover.

There's no surprise that later that group fares better.

Post reply on HN