<story><title>Cloth masks do protect the wearer</title><url>https://theconversation.com/cloth-masks-do-protect-the-wearer-breathing-in-less-coronavirus-means-you-get-less-sick-143726</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>cbsks</author><text>The linked article seems to back it up: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;link.springer.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;10.1007&amp;#x2F;s11606-020-06067-8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;link.springer.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;10.1007&amp;#x2F;s11606-020-06067-8&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In a more recent report from a different cruise ship outbreak, all passengers were issued surgical masks and all staff provided N95 masks after the initial case of COVID-19 on the ship was detected. In this closed setting with masking, where 128 of 217 passengers and staff eventually tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, the majority of infected patients on the ship (81%) remained asymptomatic, compared with 18% in the cruise ship outbreak without masking.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; A report from a pediatric hemodialysis unit in Indiana, where all patients and staff were masked, demonstrated that staff rapidly developed antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 after exposure to a single symptomatic patient with COVID-19. In the setting of masking, however, none of the new infections was symptomatic. And in a recent outbreak in a seafood processing plant in Oregon where all workers were issued masks each day at work, the rate of asymptomatic infection among the 124 infected was 95%. An outbreak in a Tyson chicken plant in Arkansas with masking also showed a 95% asymptomatic rate of infection.</text></item><item><author>nostromo</author><text>This article speaks in a very authoritative tone, but the assertions aren&amp;#x27;t fully backed by the research it links to.&lt;p&gt;And it bothers me that the quote, &amp;quot;dramatically less likely&amp;quot; is not a quote from the linked research, but seemingly just a pull quote of the article itself.&lt;p&gt;I support people wearing masks, even if it turned out to only be marginally better than not wearing one, but this article is borderline overreaching.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>chrisco255</author><text>That cruise ship didn&amp;#x27;t issue masks until after the outbreak had occurred: &amp;quot;The first recorded fever on board the ship was a febrile passenger on day 8. Isolation protocols were immediately commenced, with all passengers confined to cabins and surgical masks issued to all. Full personal protective equipment was used for any contact with any febrile patients, and N95 masks were worn for any contact with passengers in their cabins. The crew still performed duties, including meal services to the cabin doors three times a day, but rooms were not serviced. Expedition staff helped with crew duties at meal service.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;So passengers were already infected when that 81% figure was computed.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;thorax.bmj.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;75&amp;#x2F;8&amp;#x2F;693&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;thorax.bmj.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;75&amp;#x2F;8&amp;#x2F;693&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;In a village in Tuscany, over 3000 people were actively tested and 50-75% were asymptomatic: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.bmj.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;368&amp;#x2F;bmj.m1165&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.bmj.com&amp;#x2F;content&amp;#x2F;368&amp;#x2F;bmj.m1165&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;And among NYC labor and delivery patients, 88 percent were asymptomatic: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&amp;#x2F;outlook&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;04&amp;#x2F;20&amp;#x2F;we-tested-all-our-patients-covid-19-found-lots-asymptomatic-cases&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&amp;#x2F;outlook&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;04&amp;#x2F;20&amp;#x2F;we-tested-...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;This number is not at all unusual in the general population, regardless of mask wearing.</text></comment>
<story><title>Cloth masks do protect the wearer</title><url>https://theconversation.com/cloth-masks-do-protect-the-wearer-breathing-in-less-coronavirus-means-you-get-less-sick-143726</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>cbsks</author><text>The linked article seems to back it up: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;link.springer.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;10.1007&amp;#x2F;s11606-020-06067-8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;link.springer.com&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;10.1007&amp;#x2F;s11606-020-06067-8&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In a more recent report from a different cruise ship outbreak, all passengers were issued surgical masks and all staff provided N95 masks after the initial case of COVID-19 on the ship was detected. In this closed setting with masking, where 128 of 217 passengers and staff eventually tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, the majority of infected patients on the ship (81%) remained asymptomatic, compared with 18% in the cruise ship outbreak without masking.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; A report from a pediatric hemodialysis unit in Indiana, where all patients and staff were masked, demonstrated that staff rapidly developed antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 after exposure to a single symptomatic patient with COVID-19. In the setting of masking, however, none of the new infections was symptomatic. And in a recent outbreak in a seafood processing plant in Oregon where all workers were issued masks each day at work, the rate of asymptomatic infection among the 124 infected was 95%. An outbreak in a Tyson chicken plant in Arkansas with masking also showed a 95% asymptomatic rate of infection.</text></item><item><author>nostromo</author><text>This article speaks in a very authoritative tone, but the assertions aren&amp;#x27;t fully backed by the research it links to.&lt;p&gt;And it bothers me that the quote, &amp;quot;dramatically less likely&amp;quot; is not a quote from the linked research, but seemingly just a pull quote of the article itself.&lt;p&gt;I support people wearing masks, even if it turned out to only be marginally better than not wearing one, but this article is borderline overreaching.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rosywoozlechan</author><text>It makes intuitive sense that a face covering would reduce the viral load one is exposed to. I&amp;#x27;ve heard of other studies that have shown that the degree of virus exposure affects outcomes. Those involved exposure time and exposure distance to symptomatic patients with COVID-19. If a face covering reduces the viral load you get exposed to, seems like it would have the same effect as getting a lower dose exposure due to being a greater distance away or because of a reduced exposure time with a contagious individual. I hope more research supports the benefits of masks as it sounds like good news.</text></comment>