Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> and that the protective efficiency was higher when masks were worn by a virus spreader

So does this mean that between:

- virus spreader wearing a mask + non-virus spreader not wearing a mask

And:

- virus spreader not wearing a mask + non-virus spreader wearing a mask

The former is safer for the non-virus spreader?

Meaning that we’re more dependent on those spreading the virus to be diligent about wearing masks, vs. those not infected to be wearing masks?

I’m trying to make sense of why we’re seeing more cases now vs. earlier in the year when there was less knowledge and awareness of masks, and this might partially explain it.




I'll give this crack. I believe the current state of knowledge is that it likely works like this:

Mask on virus spreader: Mask will capture a very large amount of the viral load being shed.

Mask on non-spreader: Will filter some amount of the air you're breathing in and lower your initial viral load. Giving you either

A) a low enough dose your immune system kills it off or

B) a low enough dose your immune system has more time to mount a defense before the viral load in your body rises high, potentially leading to a more mild infection.

That's why we ALL need to wear a mask and stay 6ft/2 meters apart.

BTW, further is better 6ft is not a magic bubble.

Also there is aerosol transmission(floating covid in the air). Ventilation is CRITICAL for this to be stopped. Germany is spearheading ventilation as a way to stop the spread as far as I know.

They are making rules about intervals windows need to be opened etc.

Heres a BBC article covering Germany on this: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54599593

Here's a random blog that gets into it: https://dirkpaessler.blog/2020/08/13/corona-wie-co2-messgera...




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: