Tubas and COVID

[RenoDoc]

We're better than trumpets!

https://www.startribune.com/in-minnesot ... 572784222/

[KingTuba1241X]

These college kids are just trying to reinvent the wheel here. Europe has successfully been playing awhile now almost normally minus a few precautions and government interventional overreach.

[bort2.0]

The trumpet is “most problematic,”

Always the case!

[C J]

These college kids are just trying to reinvent the wheel here. Europe has successfully been playing awhile now almost normally minus a few precautions and government interventional overreach.

I wish this is the case. I live in the Netherlands and it is not allowed to gather with more then 30 people indoor, wich means it is impossible to have a concert (We can have a rehearsal with the brass ensemble but we decided not to to eleminate the risk of spreading)

The Netherlands is now undergoing the second wave of infections. We are put in a partial lockdown. When this will return to normal nobody knows.

[KingTuba1241X]

These college kids are just trying to reinvent the wheel here. Europe has successfully been playing awhile now almost normally minus a few precautions and government interventional overreach.

I wish this is the case. I live in the Netherlands and it is not allowed to gather with more then 30 people indoor, wich means it is impossible to have a concert (We can have a rehearsal with the brass ensemble but we decided not to to eleminate the risk of spreading)

The Netherlands is now undergoing the second wave of infections. We are put in a partial lockdown. When this will return to normal nobody knows.

Concertgebow was doing fine. How about Sweden? Fully open. We must always strive for truth and transparency in the words we use, so.."Cases or positive tests" versus "actual sick people" is very different as we know many many false positive test results. It's all political (even in Europe) sadly.

[bloke]

This stuff is so ridiculous, and so insulting – as are other things in our post-Orwellian world – to the word “science“.
Rather than exhaling normally, when we play we are closing off and tightening our mouths to greatly restrict our exhale air volume to a small percentage of the normal amount. Once that’s done, we’re blowing through one to two dozen feet of expanding tubing, whereby the output area is geometrically larger (defused to nearly nothing) than is the input.
Truth be told, we blow very little air through our instruments…but others thinking that we are is our own fault, as we talk about and teach our students as if we do blow a lot of air through our instruments.
What we actually do is to vibrate the air column that is in the instrument (which is why the ~QUALITY~ of the vibration of the lips is so VERY important, yet DE-EMPHASIZED by many instructors), and the fact that we very slowly displace the air in there with new air is incidental. This is why giant ogres and petite five-foot-nothing pixies - when they do it correctly – can both play the tuba quite well.
People will spend money (our money?) on “studies” like this – as if they mattered, but I guess it doesn’t occur to them to measure the snot-volume in the air from some giant ogre sneezing a huge roaring sneeze vs. some petite five-foot-nothing pixie with her delicate little “achew”.

[Shawn]

Most of the spread risk isn't to the performers; it's to a non-socially distanced audience (including toileting at intermission...)

[Colby Fahrenbacher]

People will spend money (our money?) on “studies” like this – as if they mattered, but I guess it doesn’t occur to them to measure the snot-volume in the air from some giant ogre sneezing a huge roaring sneeze vs. some petite five-foot-nothing pixie with her delicate little “achew”.

They don't need to. There has already been extensive tests regarding coughing/sneezing and transmission. We know the answer to that question. The answer is to wear a mask.

What we don't know definitively are all of the risk levels of every brass instrument and what (if any) mitigation efforts we should be taking. That's what studies like these, and others, are looking into. Until a number of scientific studies are done, we can't make informed decisions, only guesses, about how to keep each other safe.

[ppalan]

Hi,
Actually we know quite a bit about some of this. Early on in this situation, the Vienna Philharmonic produced a study, along with the Austrian Ministry of Health, that gave us a great deal of information. Here is just a brief synopsis of what what was documented:
https://www.thestrad.com/news/study-sho ... ?adredir=1
Here's a link to at least begin further investigation and information about what has already been studied if you wish:
https://www.conductorsguild.org/latest- ... e-research
I'm sure there is much more good information that has been accumulated and will be used to do further investigation.

Pete

[Yadent]

An observational study done by the CDC released September 11, 2020, showed that 85% of queried symptomatic COVID individuals wore masks either always or often---- https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6936a5.htm, and that the most likely source of infection was family contact. The gold standard for medical-dental research, policy setting, product effectiveness and recommendation are Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT's). They are the tippy-top, the apex of 'tests' and 'studies'. Far superior to observational, and mechanical observation tests/studies in terms of provable, verifiable results. There has not been one unbiased RCT that shows masks/barriers to be effective in the prevention of viral particle transmission. NOT ONE. Not surprising considering that masks can filter within micron range and all aerosolized viral particles are SUB-MICRON in size. It's physics. As for the dreaded 'droplets', if one is spilling them into their barrier, that barrier will quickly become saturated and the barrier itself WILL become an infection source. Thru the process known as 'wicking', various captured pathogens from one's barrier will be expelled into the immediate environment......at potentially higher concentrations than from normal breathing. The aforementioned CDC study, although observational, adds credence to what EVERY RCT has shown in regards to mask effectiveness.

As for masking protocol among the general public in terms of infection control......PLEASE. I have not observed ONE individual who has followed standard infection control procedures in regards to masking. Just as EVERYONE is considered potentially infectious, hence universal masking requirements, EVERY single used barrier must, by simple logic, also be considered highly infectious. However, those used barriers are handled in a manner akin to clothing accessories. Stuffed into purses, pockets, hung on car mirrors, placed on dashboards, and God knows where else. Won't surprised me one bit if masks are shown to have been a major source of pathogen spread among the populace.

As a licensed DDS of 42 years, an infection control officer for a nationally certifying, later certified California hospital for 6 years, I'm fairly well versed in infection control measures, including proper PPE usage and it's limitations. What I see occurring now in terms of pathogen transmission prevention is horrifying. I won't even go into studies (since FEBRUARY!!) showing this virus is found in feces and the implications that poses in terms of transmission.....think long term care facilities as an example.

[bloke]

post

Yes to all.
We have been put through extraordinary and destructive nonsense. I have a filthy single-use mask (which is the only mask I have used since day one) that’s all waded up and has always stunk of cotton fiber odor. I put it on when I have to - to get inside fill-in-the-blank building, and pull off the disgusting thing as soon as I can.
If I lived where some of you live - with your draconian rules, I don’t know what the hell I‘d do...and it’s a damn shame that - every time one of us gets a little cold or scratchy throat or something – we have to freak out, now.

[Alex C]

These college kids are just trying to reinvent the wheel here. Europe has successfully been playing awhile now almost normally minus a few precautions and government interventional overreach.

I'm sorry to sound like a Facebook comment here but I have not seen evidence of that from my friends who like in France, Great Britain and Germany. Gigs happen but they are outdoor gigs and are few and far between. You would have to show me some links to those performances before before I think my friends are out of step in their own country.

Unfortunately, even when musicians get on stage to perform, the audience won't be in the seats. As big a step as that will be, the bills are paid when customers are in the audience and a half-filled house doesn't pay the bills. Major orchestra concerts don't even break even at full houses, it takes huge donations to fill the gap.

We are looking at serious problems for two more years unless the press takes a 180 turn and says, "it's okay now."

[RenoDoc]

You don’t need an RCT to prove causation or to look at risk/benefit. RCTs are great, but cohort and case control studies can also help guide medical evidence. For example, there are no RCTs in humans showing tobacco causes various cancers and heart disease, yet we know the effects of tobacco.

An observational study done by the CDC released September 11, 2020, showed that 85% of queried symptomatic COVID individuals wore masks either always or often---- https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6936a5.htm, and that the most likely source of infection was family contact. The gold standard for medical-dental research, policy setting, product effectiveness and recommendation are Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT's). They are the tippy-top, the apex of 'tests' and 'studies'. Far superior to observational, and mechanical observation tests/studies in terms of provable, verifiable results. There has not been one unbiased RCT that shows masks/barriers to be effective in the prevention of viral particle transmission. NOT ONE. Not surprising considering that masks can filter within micron range and all aerosolized viral particles are SUB-MICRON in size. It's physics. As for the dreaded 'droplets', if one is spilling them into their barrier, that barrier will quickly become saturated and the barrier itself WILL become an infection source. Thru the process known as 'wicking', various captured pathogens from one's barrier will be expelled into the immediate environment......at potentially higher concentrations than from normal breathing. The aforementioned CDC study, although observational, adds credence to what EVERY RCT has shown in regards to mask effectiveness.

As for masking protocol among the general public in terms of infection control......PLEASE. I have not observed ONE individual who has followed standard infection control procedures in regards to masking. Just as EVERYONE is considered potentially infectious, hence universal masking requirements, EVERY single used barrier must, by simple logic, also be considered highly infectious. However, those used barriers are handled in a manner akin to clothing accessories. Stuffed into purses, pockets, hung on car mirrors, placed on dashboards, and God knows where else. Won't surprised me one bit if masks are shown to have been a major source of pathogen spread among the populace.

As a licensed DDS of 42 years, an infection control officer for a nationally certifying, later certified California hospital for 6 years, I'm fairly well versed in infection control measures, including proper PPE usage and it's limitations. What I see occurring now in terms of pathogen transmission prevention is horrifying. I won't even go into studies (since FEBRUARY!!) showing this virus is found in feces and the implications that poses in terms of transmission.....think long term care facilities as an example.

[RenoDoc]

By the way, I just started this thread since I thought it was an interesting way to start to look at aersolization from wind instruments. I was hoping that it wouldn’t turn into the same debate about the best COVID public health policies that our country has been having more months now.

[Rick Denney]

Viral transmission is not some binary thing. Getting a big dose is worse than getting a small dose, and being exposed often or for extended periods is worse that a passing minor exposure, in terms of the likelihood of getting sick.

Nothing we do eliminates risk. But we can sure reduce exposure and reduce the viral load if we do get exposed.

The filter sieve size for an N95 mask is 0.3 microns. But it stops many particles smaller than that, because they are still trapped in the filter by electrostatic attraction. It is indeed effective at stopping the vast majority of aerosols, even the smallest examples. Yes, it can become contaminated. But it’s no more likely to become contaminated than its owner is to inhale virus aerosols, and even if contaminated, most particles stay in the mask.

Again, it’s not binary. If I can stop 60% of virus particles with a mask, it reduces the probability of infection in the presence of viral aerosols by 60%, and the viral load received. If it caused pain or some other health threat, maybe it would be foolish. But it doesn’t. It’s an easy method for lowering probabilities, probably better than a vaccine, even if it is already contaminated. And the virus trapped in the mask eventually becomes non-viable—perhaps after 2-3 days at most.

I know many doctors that reuse N95s because they must. A soiled N95 may be contaminated, but it still reduces transmitted viral load. Tomorrow it will be less infectious than today, and today The person in question was wearing it. The risk of reuse is acute when masks are passed from person to person, but that’s not happening. If I touch it with my hands, I don’t infect myself, because I can wash my hands and soap is more effective than alcohol.

Most people who get infected wear masks, because masks are required most places where infection is likely. So what? That’s like saying most people in traffic accidents were in a car. People in frequent, dangerous contact with infectious people have some probability of getting infected. The mask lowers that probability. But how about people in frequent, dangerous contact with infectious people who don’t wear a mask? Their risk is higher. But fewer of them avoid the mask so of course fewer of them will be represented in the infected population.

And the probability of getting infected through a mask is reduced much further if both people are wearing them. If the probability of infection through a mask is 40%, and the probability of infecting an unmasked person when the infectious person is wearing a mask is 40%, then the probability of being infected if both are wearing masks is 16%—.4 times .4. That’s simple probability math for independent stochastic processes. If the probability is lower—say 10%—then the joint probability with both people wearing masks is 1%.

Significant reductions in transmission probability are worthwhile until we have other means of significant reductions, such as an even moderately effective vaccine. And reducing the probability for the individual also has the chance of undermining the math of exponential infection in the public at large.

Masks are similar to seat belts. They don’t provide ultimate protection by any means, but they (and a range of similar measures) do improve one’s chances of survival from traffic crashes significantly enough to reduce highway fatalities from 50,000 per year year to the middle thirties over several decades during which vehicle miles traveled much more than doubled. Yet there continue to be those who incorrectly and foolishly believe seat belts increase injury risk, using the most unlikely scenarios to prove their point.

Sorry, but non-scientists are misinterpreting scientific studies on both sides of these arguments. I deal with stochastic measurements and processes professionally all the time, and I’m happy to work at the Pareto front—the 80% risk reduction that comes from the most obvious 20% in protective actions.

Rick “whose homemade masks use blue shop towels, an abundant non-woven polyester filter material measured to be effective against 0.3-micron particles when sandwiched between two layers of washable cloth, when not wearing a NIOSH N95, when in risky situations such as even moderately crowded public spaces” Denney

[Rick Denney]

By the way, I just started this thread since I thought it was an interesting way to start to look at aersolization from wind instruments. I was hoping that it wouldn’t turn into the same debate about the best COVID public health policies that our country has been having more months now.

Agreed, but they are mutually dependent. It’s wrong for public officials to insist that playing an instrument is particularly risky, but it’s also wrong to deny the risk reduction of easy protective actions for those times when the musician’s mouth is not sealed against the mouthpiece rim.

Rick “suggesting a reasonable mix of behaviors” Denney

[Yadent]

I presume you are a healthcare doc and would know, as I stated, that RCT's ARE the gold standard in terms of medical/dental research. Being there is not ONE RCT that shows mask viral transmission prevention, should speaks volumes. You might be interested as a physician in this mask 'study' from 1979-1980 which has had over a dozen attempts at being refuted, with ALL attempts failing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/

My comments were not primarily directed at the instrument 'emissions' study but on the masking comment. Unfortunately the barrier/other mandates have spilled over into the music world creating such fear that many groups may not recover....which would be a shame. ESPECIALLY among the young, the group least affected by this 'virus'. I read data/the numbers from CDC, NIH, John Hopkins, and other sources. I know who is primarily affected and who is not by the virus. I know that music ensembles are not even on the radar in terms of being a vector. Even that choir in Washington has questions as to infection source as the group shared snacks AFTER their 2.5 hour rehearsal. In other words, studies such as the instrument emissions one, appear to be solutions in such of a problem. As I mentioned, this virus has been found in feces. That could partially explain why this respiratory virus was VERY infectious during the summer months when the normal cold/flu season diminishes in activity, 'the virus' acting more akin to a norovirus, the bane of cruise ships regardless of climate conditions. If this be the case, and I suspect it might be, then the harm done to the arts along with 'life' in general would have been needless.
You don't destroy lives to save them. You don't take drastic action without drastic proof. EVERY model regarding this virus has been wrong and because of that, the music world, a big part of my world now, has been put on indefinite hold.......and at my age, I don't have an indefinite future timeline.

Protect the vulnerable, let everyone else proceed with living as they see fit......

[tofu]

Absolutely agree with Rick D. I don't know why this is so hard for people to comprehend.

We were supposed to have a concert today - outside in front of our concert hall.

October in Chicago - a triple play day - rain, wind gusts of 15-25mph - and a lovely raw 43 degrees F. Concert cancelled. Going to be interesting to see how well groups of all stripes hang together through all this. Especially in the northern climes where winter is fast approaching & shutting down most attempts going forward of outside rehearsals / concerts. I see they're talking 6-10 inches of snow across MN later this week. Ugh.

[KingTuba1241X]

These college kids are just trying to reinvent the wheel here. Europe has successfully been playing awhile now almost normally minus a few precautions and government interventional overreach.

I'm sorry to sound like a Facebook comment here but I have not seen evidence of that from my friends who like in France, Great Britain and Germany. Gigs happen but they are outdoor gigs and are few and far between. You would have to show me some links to those performances before before I think my friends are out of step in their own country.

Unfortunately, even when musicians get on stage to perform, the audience won't be in the seats. As big a step as that will be, the bills are paid when customers are in the audience and a half-filled house doesn't pay the bills. Major orchestra concerts don't even break even at full houses, it takes huge donations to fill the gap.

We are looking at serious problems for two more years unless the press takes a 180 turn and says, "it's okay now."

Mnozil Brass has been really busy playing to semi-packed audiences, Concertgebouw has already done some shows and the Mariinsky Theatre Orchestra in St. Petersburg performs live with a decent audience weekly. Don't let the U.S. be a gauge for your opinion.

[RenoDoc]

I'm a family physician and I also have a masters in Epidemiology and have done a fair amount of research.

A study you linked looking at post operative wound infections (typically bacterial infections) is very different than what we're dealing with due to COVID. Also, that's not an RCT. So if you are insisting on an RCT to prove something, that's not the study.

I"m interested at how you would design an RCT showing masks work for COVID. Typically, to properly do an RCT, you need to blind the subjects and the researchers to control group or intervention group to eliminate any bias. That's easy to do in a drug treatment trial or vaccine trial. How are you going to design the study so that people don't know if they are wearing masks or now. Also, properly doing an RCT takes a fair amount of time and there is good observational data coming out that masks do help to reduce transmission.

One interesting theory that is coming out is that masks are helping to reduce viral inoculum which in turn is reducing disease severity. It's still just a theory with COVID 19 but this changes the idea that you are wearing a mask to help others- wearing a mask may help yourself. I was pretty skeptical but if you have an hour, this is worth a listen. Dr. Monica Gandhi is a UCSF professor of Medicine in the division of HIV, infectious diseases, and global medicine. They have a follow up podcast last where do they encourage opening things up that you'd probably like as well. https://zdoggmd.com/monica-gandhi/

I presume you are a healthcare doc and would know, as I stated, that RCT's ARE the gold standard in terms of medical/dental research. Being there is not ONE RCT that shows mask viral transmission prevention, should speaks volumes. You might be interested as a physician in this mask 'study' from 1979-1980 which has had over a dozen attempts at being refuted, with ALL attempts failing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/

My comments were not primarily directed at the instrument 'emissions' study but on the masking comment. Unfortunately the barrier/other mandates have spilled over into the music world creating such fear that many groups may not recover....which would be a shame. ESPECIALLY among the young, the group least affected by this 'virus'. I read data/the numbers from CDC, NIH, John Hopkins, and other sources. I know who is primarily affected and who is not by the virus. I know that music ensembles are not even on the radar in terms of being a vector. Even that choir in Washington has questions as to infection source as the group shared snacks AFTER their 2.5 hour rehearsal. In other words, studies such as the instrument emissions one, appear to be solutions in such of a problem. As I mentioned, this virus has been found in feces. That could partially explain why this respiratory virus was VERY infectious during the summer months when the normal cold/flu season diminishes in activity, 'the virus' acting more akin to a norovirus, the bane of cruise ships regardless of climate conditions. If this be the case, and I suspect it might be, then the harm done to the arts along with 'life' in general would have been needless.
You don't destroy lives to save them. You don't take drastic action without drastic proof. EVERY model regarding this virus has been wrong and because of that, the music world, a big part of my world now, has been put on indefinite hold.......and at my age, I don't have an indefinite future timeline.

Protect the vulnerable, let everyone else proceed with living as they see fit......