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

The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 298 posts

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#271

Post by mc32 »

sebazzz wrote: post #207
sndean wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah probably reduced, but it may be more to do with them becoming contaminated. The link points to a study saying > One study found that nurses averaged 25 touches per shift to their face, eyes, or N95 respirator during extended use. How problematic that touching is probably scales with how problematic your environment is. They're pretty sponge-like. Wearing a surgical mask over an N95 would help a lot. In a control…

> Yeah probably reduced, but it may be more to do with them becoming contaminated. How effective is the virus after the mask has been unused for a while (so "cold", like a doorknob or a desk)? If it is not, the mask should be good to go then, doesn't it?

No idea but some people (whose source I don’t know) say the virus can live on some surfaces to nine days. Guess one could use sterilants/disinfectants to accelerate that time dramatically.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#272

Post by cameldrv »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #227
Symmetry wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that different sources are using different definitions of "effective" here. If a simple surgical mask cuts down transmission rates by 50% that isn't anywhere near good enough for health workers working with sick patients every day. But it might still make a significant improvement in your chances of getting infected and, combined with social distancing, might drop the R0 below 1. Hence why Chinese and Korean…

The problem is that a mask that isn't regularly replaced and handled very carefully actually increases your chances of catching the virus, via a mask->hand->face transmission.

Is there data or a study that says that risks increase from using masks poorly? I’ve looked into the literature and everything I’ve seen says they are significantly protective in real-world use.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#273

Post by cameldrv »

penagwin wrote: post #259
whatshisface wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, how? If it's on the mask wouldn't it be on the face if the mask wasn't there? What process puts viruses on masks but not faces?

IMO the biggest problem is people "feel safe" with a mask on, they may not take other precautions. Also my understanding is that a N95 mask that isn't properly worn (doesn't have a good seal) then it's nearly equivalent to no mask at all. So you combine those two together and you have people who aren't effectively protected by the mask and are making riskier decisions.

Is this based on data or just a feeling you have?

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#274

Post by 24gttghh »

luckylion wrote: post #237
SubiculumCode wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the fear was of a mask shortage. Infected quarantined > Potentially Infected COVID-19 contacts wearing masks > Uninfected wearing masks.

Can someone shed some light on the difficulties of producing the "simple" surgical masks? I'm not talking about something that filters the incoming air, but the lame kind that just reduces the amount of liquids you disperse when breathing, coughing, sneezing etc. Are they so high tech you can't just ramp up production? And how many months in advance would you need to ramp it up? We're about 3 months in and nobody got…

My assumption: They're made in China. Where everything is shut down.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#276

Post by thijsvandien »

T-A wrote: post #89
thijsvandien wrote: post #32

As a side observation: most reporting seems rather binary, i.e. you either die or survive, period. What interests me the most, however, is how often survival means full recovery, especially now that the nervous system comes up. Are there any long term effects? Should one generally expect to come out of it worse, the same, or stronger? I'm much less afraid to die from this than to end up with chronic respiratory and/o…

There's a "nice" damage report here: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/here-is-w... If it gets to the point of causing pneumonia, you may end up with permanent loss of lung tissue. If it spreads to the rest of the body, liver and kidney damage are also on the menu.

Well, careful what you wish for... :)

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#277

Post by asveikau »

refurb wrote: post #145
tjt wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is super scary. Before I read this I was happily thinking hey it's no worse than flu. Now... I'm wishing I didn't live in a huge city riding the subway daily.

I don't understand the worry. As of yesterday, China, a country of 1.4B, had 80,000 cases and 3,000 dead. Last year, the US had 36M infected with the flu and 34,000 died.[1] Are you panicking about the flu? [1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

3,000 / 80,000 = 0.0375

34,000 / 36,000,000 = ~0.00094

36,000,000 * 0.0375 = 1,350,000

That's the concern.

China also had some pretty extreme measures to get their low number of cases, measures I don't think will play out too well in the US. And probably won't have a full count yet.

We can hope for the best, we can wash hands etc., but it's not unrealistic to say this can get bad.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#278

Post by ludwigvan »

mc32 wrote: post #271
sebazzz wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah probably reduced, but it may be more to do with them becoming contaminated. How effective is the virus after the mask has been unused for a while (so "cold", like a doorknob or a desk)? If it is not, the mask should be good to go then, doesn't it?

No idea but some people (whose source I don’t know) say the virus can live on some surfaces to nine days. Guess one could use sterilants/disinfectants to accelerate that time dramatically.

Coronavirus can persist up to 9 days on inanimate surfaces. 70% ethanol can disinfect the surface within 1 minute.

Source: https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/S0195-670...

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#279

Post by sdinsn »

viggity wrote: post #190
clon wrote: post #61

Would this explain the apparent sudden collapse of people on the streets in China and Iran? [1] [1] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/people-collapsing-coronavi...

Folks, if you see someone collapse on the street and they're wearing a mask. TAKE THE MASK OFF OF THEM. They're not getting enough oxygen. It is taxing to breath through an N95 mask. Source: I passed out when I put on a surgical mask while my wife was getting an epidural. Not from seeing the needle because I didn't even see the needle, and I don't get squeamish anyway. I have low blood oxygen and it was too hard to b…

Perhaps I'm selfish, but if I see someone wearing a mask and they collapse, the last thing I'm going to do is get near them...

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#280

Post by rolph »

jessriedel wrote: post #270
rolph wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the neuronal terminals leading to a lobe of the brain innervate the nasal mucosa. the optic nerve is hidden behind the eye with a substantial barrier of non nervous tissue in front of it. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/Sc...

Can the infection move through nervous tissue more easily than non-nervous tissue?

that doesnt seem to be the case. this virus really likes your lungs because of a specific protien. this protien exists in your lungs at a greater concentration than elsewhere in your body. The virus would have to undergo a specific series of mutations to get good at targeting neurons.
Post reply on HN