Abstract
Background Masking serves an important role in reducing the transmission of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. During the COVID-19 pandemic, several perspective and review articles have also argued that masking reduces the risk of developing severe disease by reducing the inoculum dose received by the contact. This hypothesis – known as the ‘variolation hypothesis’ – has gained considerable traction since its development.
Methods To assess the plausibility of this hypothesis, we develop a quantitative framework for understanding the relationship between (i) inoculum dose and the risk of infection and (ii) inoculum dose and the risk of developing severe disease. We parameterize the mathematical models underlying this framework with parameters relevant for SARS-CoV-2 to quantify these relationships empirically and to gauge the range of inoculum doses in natural infections. We then identify and analyze relevant experimental studies of SARS-CoV-2 to ascertain the extent of empirical support for the proposed framework.
Results Mathematical models, when simulated under parameter values appropriate for SARS-CoV-2, indicate that the risk of infection and the risk of developing severe disease both increase with an increase in inoculum dose. However, the risk of infection increases from low to almost certain infection at low inoculum doses (with <1000 initially infected cells). In contrast, the risk of developing severe disease is only sensitive to dose at very high inoculum levels, above 106 initially infected cells. By drawing on studies that have estimated transmission bottleneck sizes of SARS-CoV-2, we find that inoculum doses are low in natural SARS-CoV-2 infections. As such, reductions in inoculum dose through masking or greater social distancing are expected to reduce the risk of infection but not the risk of developing severe disease conditional on infection. Our review of existing experimental studies support this finding.
Conclusions We find that masking and other measures such as distancing that act to reduce inoculum doses in natural infections are highly unlikely to impact the contact’s risk of developing severe disease conditional on infection. However, in support of existing empirical studies, we find that masking and other mitigation measures that reduce inoculum dose are expected to reduce the risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Our findings therefore undermine the plausibility of the variolation hypothesis, underscoring the need to focus on other factors such as comorbidities and host age for understanding the heterogeneity in disease outcomes for SARS-CoV-2.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by NIH/NIAID Centers of Excellence in Influenza Research and Response (CEIRR), contract number 75N93021C00017 to KK, RA and ACL. DW was supported by the Simons Foundation via a Mathematical Modeling of Living Systems Investigator award, the Sloan Foundation via a Research Fellowship, the NSF via CAREER award PHY-2146260, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation grant 2919.02, and the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics by NSF grant PHY-1748958.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
