Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

news.northwestern.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 185 posts

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#131

Post by landemva »

mrguyorama wrote: post #116
landemva wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the data was clear enough that the vaccines are worth getting Unlike like measles or polio, these misnamed 'vaccines' don't prevent getting the disease nor transmitting the virus. I think young healthy people should get the disease, recover, develop antibodies, and be done with it. We did this for chicken pox until a couple decades ago.

>Unlike like measles or polio The polio vaccine children receive today in the United States is non-steralizing. If this anti-vaxxer assumption was meaningful, we wouldn't have fewer cases of polio. >We did this for chicken pox until a couple decades ago. Fun, because that's having great side effects, notably, that shingles sucks ass, and now that there isn't a giant amount of chickenpox virus in every closed space be…

I'm not familiar with _unvaxed_ people getting coronavirus multiple times (prior infection confirmed by antibody blood test).

I got it once and blood tests show continued strong antibodies. Since then I haven't even had the flu in a couple years. I have heard of many vaxed people getting coronavirus multiple times, including prominent world leaders.

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#132

Post by weaksauce »

taeric wrote: post #108
ralferoo wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the data was clear enough that the vaccines are worth getting. However, this seems to shatter any thoughts folks may have that they are safer to others when they are vaccinated? That's not the correct conclusion from this statement though. Taking the vaccine increases the likelihood that your immune system will be able to get kill the virus almost immediately after exposure, so that you don't start exhibiti…

I'm game to see more on that. This study specifically, shows that you can be vaccinated and get it. You will have fewer symptoms, but still shed just as much virus. That is literally what their callout was about, no? If you are claiming that you are less likely to get it when you are vaccinated, that kind of contradicts a lot of what I've seen out there. I'm happy to learn that is mostly paranoia, though? I haven't a…

> This study specifically, shows that you can be vaccinated and get it. You will have fewer symptoms, but still shed just as much virus.

no. the study shows that the vaccine status doesn't change how much you shed for a given level of symptoms. aka high symptomatic => high viral shed. lowly symptomatic => low viral shed.

from the actual pre-print's[0] abstract:

> We further found that levels of exhaled viral RNA increased with self-rated symptom-severity, though individual variation was high. Levels of exhaled viral RNA did not differ across age, sex, time of day, vaccination status or viral variant.

0. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.09.06.23295138v...

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#133

Post by aodonnell2536 »

op00to wrote: post #73
taeric wrote: post #66

"We further found that levels of exhaled viral RNA increased with self-rated symptom-severity, though individual variation was high." I was curious on how high the variation was, so checked that out. There is a fairly wide swing in measurements. Not clear what that means on things. Would love to see more conversation on that. Most concerning on this, though, is "Levels of exhaled viral RNA did not differ across age,…

If you don’t get Covid because you got the vaccine, that’s a benefit to others.

Receiving the COVID vaccine does not prevent the contraction of COVID or ability to spread it, it only lessens the symptoms after infection

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#134

Post by weaksauce »

gumby wrote: post #130
mcpackieh wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It used to be 80% of people didn't wear a seatbelt. A few years ago, 80% of people who wore a mask. Which way are these things trending? Wearing a seatbelt has become the normal attitude towards car risk. Wearing a mask was briefly the normal attitude towards risk, but has since become [again] an abnormal attitude towards risk. If you're so keen to be abnormally safe and think everybody else is being unreasonable,…

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. Are people with masks hurting you in some way?

> Are people with masks hurting you in some way?

they are making the people that want to pretend the virus is just something you have to live with instead of taking precautionary measures feel bad.

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#135

Post by Scoundreller »

in_cahoots wrote: post #123
GloriousKoji wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like the CDC reducing the suggested isolation time from 10 days to 5 was a mistake.

My family (2 adults, 2 kids) was all vaccinated and the adults boosted when we got Covid for the first time. We all tested positive for 7+ days, and the baby was positive on Day 10 via a PCR test. Just one data point but 5 days has never seemed like long enough to me.

I kinda wonder if the test is really good at catching more sinus-nasal infections and not so much lung-driven infections where there’s a lot more surface area to shed virus from.

Or am I to assume if you’re infected, it’s caked along the entire respiratory tract.

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#136

Post by talldatethrow »

elil17 wrote: post #67
talldatethrow wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was sick, or if there was a meaningful sickness in the air, I would wear a mask. But I wouldn't say there is zero downside to wearing a mask, atleast the way 98% of people wore one during covid. (The same one all day, if not a week, touching it, putting it in pockets, around your neck, on your greasy forehead, so on). I used to wear a mask because allergies when I mowed the lawn or even dirtbiking during certain…

"It absolutely reduces your ability to take it oxygen easily." This is absolutely false. There is very strong evidence that masks do not effect gas exchange. One example of many: https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/face-masks-may-inc... Masks do make your lung muscles work slightly harder, but there's nothing wrong with that.

Your first sentence and last sentence basically contradict each other....

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#137

Post by talldatethrow »

elil17 wrote: post #100
mrob wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only talking about low oxygen demand scenarios. "Each participant performed a six-minute walk test" I've personally tested (out of curiosity) bicycling performance while wearing a half-face respirator that's barely noticeable during walking. Both measured speed and subjective difficulty were severely affected during high intensity exercise.

That sounds reasonable, but even then it doesn't mean someone shouldn't wear a mask. Their performance would be decreased, but it doesn't mean that it would be medically dangerous (they would not have low blood oxygenation, for example).

I'm currently dating a 6th grade school teacher. She said when they returned to school with masks the kids were for sure more lethargic and even woozy more often than she had ever seen in her 10 years teaching. As masks were removed over time, it went away more and more.

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#138

Post by taeric »

weaksauce wrote: post #132
taeric wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm game to see more on that. This study specifically, shows that you can be vaccinated and get it. You will have fewer symptoms, but still shed just as much virus. That is literally what their callout was about, no? If you are claiming that you are less likely to get it when you are vaccinated, that kind of contradicts a lot of what I've seen out there. I'm happy to learn that is mostly paranoia, though? I haven't a…

> This study specifically, shows that you can be vaccinated and get it. You will have fewer symptoms, but still shed just as much virus. no. the study shows that the vaccine status doesn't change how much you shed for a given level of symptoms. aka high symptomatic => high viral shed. lowly symptomatic => low viral shed. from the actual pre-print's[0] abstract: > We further found that levels of exhaled viral RNA incr…

Apologies, that is inline with what I meant. You will shed proportional to your level of symptoms. If you were vaccinated and still get heavily sick, you will still shed as any other heavily sick person.

That said, the caveat of "though individual variation was high" makes me curious if some of the correlation to self-rated symptom goes away when you only look at something like vaccination status.

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#139

Post by gumby »

weaksauce wrote: post #134
gumby wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. Are people with masks hurting you in some way?

> Are people with masks hurting you in some way? they are making the people that want to pretend the virus is just something you have to live with instead of taking precautionary measures feel bad.

Oh, thanks! I will now straighten my shoulders and walk with pride, knowing I am repressing some busybodies who want to butt into my business.

Re: Covid patients breathe out large amounts of virus early on

#140

Post by mint2 »

taeric wrote: post #129
mint2 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think this is quite right of a reading “This would imply that they did not find a correlation between vaccination and severity of symptoms in their testing.” Instead, I think a more accurate rough understanding of their process is they first backed out the effect of severity and then checked if vaccine was correlated with that adjusted number - they found it wasn’t. They didn’t make an assessment on how vacci…

My read wasn't that they made an assessment of vaccine on severity. Rather, I read that they found that it had no impact on transmission. They found that, on average, self reported severity correlated with transmission. However, they then state that transmission does not correlate with vaccination status. I could hope that they mean there is no extra relation between vaccination status and transmission above reduced…

I agree it is poorly stated, but that is what they mean, no extra impact beyond reduced symptoms and the benefit thereof.
Post reply on HN