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

71–80 of 298 posts

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#71

Post by tmaly »

Proziam wrote: post #63
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…

EDIT - Just to be clear, I'm not saying that people shouldn't take precautions or that it's not worth protecting vulnerable groups. I'm simply suggesting that perhaps there is news coverage about other things (remember the whole Hong Kong situation that we aren't hearing about suddenly?) that might still deserve some air time. The media is profiting off this story big time. It's like when the plane went missing and a…

I would like to see more details about those affected, age, immuno compromised or not, asthma or not. Its hard to really draw any comparison to flu or anything else as things stand right now.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#72

Post by decebalus1 »

kaylynb wrote: post #49
morpheuskafka wrote: post #15

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'm not sure I would call them impractical for everyday wear. I wear N95 masks when commuting during active wildfires. The news always says not to wear them because you won't put them on properly, but it's really not that hard to ensure the fitment is correct. It's not like the construction workers that wear them occupationally are rocket scientists. My partner is more vulnerable to respiratory problems and has alway…

> I'm not sure I would call them impractical for everyday wear. I wear N95 masks when commuting during active wildfires.

Right on. For the past couple of years, because the Seattle summers have been hazy due to the wildfire smoke, I still have quite a large batch of N95 masks. I too used to wear them during my commute and the only problem I see is that if you're at risk (underlying respiratory/heart problems) you'll not be able to tolerate the mask... With a good fitment, it makes it harder to breathe.

I think it's unfair to label people hoarders for having these masks... After a couple of consecutive years of wildfire smoke, I think this is the new normal and everyone should have them. It's not my problem that the healthcare industry has a supply issue with these masks, they should have a different, hopefully more efficient and preferential supply chain. I hope they don't buy them from Home Depot (where I got them from).

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#73

Post by W4ldi »

testplzignore wrote: post #27
newsbinator wrote: post #4

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?

that's kind of what all vaccines do. so I guess you're right. (but I'm not an expert)

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#74

Post by lisper »

zapita wrote: post #46
morpheuskafka wrote: post #15

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.

Regular surgical masks won't protect your from inhaling the virus, but they will protect you from rubbing your face and nose 100 times a day with contaminated hands, without even noticing it. I wouldn't dismiss their efficacy.

If that's your goal (and it is not an unreasonable one) you can achieve that with a bandanna. You don't need a surgical mask.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#75

Post by Enginerrrd »

cryoshon wrote: post #24
DailyHN wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Considering the potential neuroinvasion of SARS-CoV-2, antiviral therapy should be carried out as early as possible to block its entry into the CNS. Airway inhalation of antiviral agents will be the first choice at the early stage of infection, which will inhibit the replication SARS-CoV-2 in the respiratory tracts and lung and prevent from its subsequent neuroinvasion. It is also urgent to find effective antiviral…

>corticosteroids may have no treatment effect isn't the point of the corticosteriods to rapidly reduce widespread pulmonary inflammation that would otherwise kill the patient?

Yes, but it suggests that it could be important to distinguish whether the cause of their decline and hypoxia is CNS respiratory depression or issues with lung function before making that call.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#76

Post by allendoerfer »

drcode wrote: post #62
kaylynb wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I would call them impractical for everyday wear. I wear N95 masks when commuting during active wildfires. The news always says not to wear them because you won't put them on properly, but it's really not that hard to ensure the fitment is correct. It's not like the construction workers that wear them occupationally are rocket scientists. My partner is more vulnerable to respiratory problems and has alway…

Telling people they should wear masks because they don't put them on properly is like telling people they shouldn't drive cars because some people drive them into trees.

I am bookmarking this comment for the time after self-driving cars have become universally available.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#77

Post by StanislavPetrov »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #15
aazaa wrote: post #10

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.

>need to be conserved for public health users.

I think we should all ask ourselves why we take it for granted that we should simply have to ration masks. Why aren't there enough masks available for everyone for inevitable outbreaks like this? Why don't we have the industrial capacity to manufacture masks in the US, leaving us reliant on foreign imports?

We spend ~$80 billion dollars a month on our endless war, military and spy agencies in the name of "national security", but I'd argue that having ample medical supplies (and the ability to manufacture them) are just as, if not more important, to our "national security" as the vast majority of our military activities. Hopefully this crisis will not become to severe and will serve as a wakeup call for us to rethink our national priorities before the next inevitable crisis.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#78

Post by baq »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #22
morpheuskafka wrote: post #15

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.

You must also remember about disposing of the mask properly. E.g. don’t put used masks in your pockets.

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#79

Post by mobilefriendly »

Proziam wrote: post #63
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…

EDIT - Just to be clear, I'm not saying that people shouldn't take precautions or that it's not worth protecting vulnerable groups. I'm simply suggesting that perhaps there is news coverage about other things (remember the whole Hong Kong situation that we aren't hearing about suddenly?) that might still deserve some air time. The media is profiting off this story big time. It's like when the plane went missing and a…

SARS, which is closely related to Covid-19, has caused chronic problems in some patients. Here's a reputable source on that from 2010: https://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2010/09/02/sars...

Re: The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV2

#80

Post by jessriedel »

aazaa wrote: post #10

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…

Why is it easier to get to the brain from the nose compares to the mouth or eyes?
Post reply on HN