Last week we launched an in-depth series on the Coronavirus pandemic. While that takes a deep dive into Covid-19, there was a particularly interesting new report in The Lancet this week. It looked at people exposed to patients with Covid-19 in several settings, including medical centers and homes. The researchers found a dramatic benefit from using face masks, social distancing and eye protection.
I am surprised this report is not getting more coverage. Many people around the world are not using face masks or social distancing because they suspect it is nonsense. This study shows that being careful can reduce the risk of infection by as much as 88%. The public needs to know this because many people would start being more careful. This would reduce the number of infections and deaths while we wait for a vaccine.
The Lancet is one of the world’s premier medical and scientific journals. It is for scientists and not the lay public. Consequently, some of the articles use so much jargon that they can be very difficult to understand.
The Lancet article takes a deep dive into the math behind face masks and social distancing.
The article that caught my attention was a statistical analysis of 172 other studies. The studies were done on six continents and involved 25,000 patients. None of the studies was randomized. They were all observational, which makes them less reliable.
However, the analysis found several statistically significant results. The math is boring and beyond this article. Here is my summary of the research.
If someone is exposed to a person with Covid-19, he reduces his risk of infection by 83% if he wears a face mask. His risk of getting infected if he wears a mask is 3.1% compared to 17.4% without a mask. That is an 83% reduction of risk. The risk is even less with a N95 mask. But since the infection is mostly spread through big droplets, even a disposable mask is very helpful.
What if he stays two meters (about 6 feet) away from the contagious person? His risk of infection is only 1.5% compared to 13% for people getting within one meter of the patient. That is an 88% reduction in risk. If he stays three meters away (10 feet) instead of two meters, the risk is reduced by another 50%.
Finally, they looked at people who wear eye protection, like eyeglasses, googles or face shields. Their risk of infection is 6% compared to 16% for people without. That is a 62% reduction. This is less dramatic than for face masks because most infections come through your mouth and nose.
The study helps explain the rally
If you think about it, this study provides an explanation for the dramatic reversal up from the March crash. The market sold off strongly because of New York hospitals getting overwhelmed. Everyone was afraid this experience would spread across the country and be incredibly devastating to the economy.
Once people started to be careful, the curve flattened. The rate of new cases stayed below the capacity of the hospitals to handle Coronavirus patients. This prevented the New York disaster from spreading across the country. The market quickly sensed this and rallied strongly since.
Obviously, it would not have rallied without the Federal Reserve’s stimulus. But the Fed alone could not have done it. Traders had to feel that the pandemic was going to be much less of a problem than what the 34% selloff indicated.
The study validates common sense
Back in February and March, Dr. Anthony Fauci was saying Americans should not wear face masks unless a person is infected. He said the purpose of the mask was to prevent a patient from infecting others.
When he said that, I thought this was clearly nonsense and probably politically motivated. If everyone buys masks, there would be fewer for doctors and nurses, and the news would make the White House look even more unprepared.
Common sense told us that any barrier to the virus reduces our risk. I was wearing masks and gloves and practicing social distancing from the outset. It quickly became clear to everyone that wearing masks and keeping a distance from others made sense. The result was the rate of spread decreased to the point that hospitals could handle the new cases. This study provides a mathematical reason why being careful makes sense.
Vaccine benefit might not last long
There are several types of viruses that cause the common cold. These include rhinoviruses, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), parainfluenza viruses and coronaviruses.
A person recovers from the cold as his body builds an immune response to the virus. Once his body makes enough antibodies, the virus can no longer infect new cells and the white blood cells clean up what virus is left.
There is one problem with the immunity that people get when their cold is caused by a coronavirus. It is that the immunity typically only lasts three to six months. Sometimes, it lasts a year.
Will we need booster shots?
The duration of the immunity is a concern for scientists trying to create a vaccine to protect against Covid-19. It is also caused by a Coronavirus. If the immunity lasts a year, then the vaccine companies can simply add a Coronavirus vaccine to our annual flu shot. No problem.
But what happens if the immunity only lasts three months? That is a major problem, not only for vaccine makers but for people who recover from Covid-19. It means they can catch it again a few months later.
Scientists are confident that they will be able to create a safe and effective vaccine. They will study how long the immunity lasts. They will measure the level of antibodies of immunized patients regularly to see if the immunity goes away. Also, how long will the antibody level be high enough to prevent reinfection?
If people can get a Covid-19 infection repeatedly after three to six months, there would be a floor to the number of infected people in society. Coronavirus would not go away. It would be endemic. There would be a lot of missed work, lower annual income, reduced consumer spending, lower corporate profits and lower stock prices.
No one wants to get a booster shot every three months forever. Most people would refuse. The problem could theoretically continue for years until scientists come up with a vaccine that provides longer immunity. A reasonable minimum goal is one year of immunity.
Can you get Covid-19 twice?
We do not know how long immunity to Covid-19 will last. This is true whether you get immunity from having the infection or from having the disease. If your protective antibodies fall below some critical level, you can get infected again.
However, your body now knows how to make these antibodies. It does not have to figure it out again. Also, if you get Covid-19 a second time, you will probably still have some immunity left over from the first time. That should reduce the severity of the infection.
Since your body already knows what antibodies are needed, you will make them sooner. That should reduce the duration of the illness.
No one wants Covid-19 one time, let alone two times. However, a second case will probably be much less severe.
Trading Room
Traders can see the end of the day bar-by-bar price action report by signing up for free at BrooksPriceAction.com. I talk about the detailed E-mini price action real-time throughout the day in the BrooksPriceAction.com trading room. We offer a two-day free trial.
