17 comments

  • HPsquared 16 hours ago
    I use a similar nasal spray for allergies (Becodefence). Basically a physical barrier coating the nasal passages. For me and my allergies, it's super effective.

    Never thought about using it to block viral infections, but it makes sense: coating the nasal passages with artificial "mucus-like substance" so particles don't reach the membranes. Makes total sense that approach also work for viruses.

    • Emoticon4032 13 hours ago
      A couple of decades ago, I was on a commercial aircraft and sat next to a man who occasionally puffed something into his nostrils. It turned out that he was a researcher at Ft. Detrick, and he explained that keeping your nasal passages moist with saline spray helped to keep out germs. I’ve been using saline sprays ever since!
      • tshaddox 13 hours ago
        That’s one of the leading explanations for why flu outbreaks are seasonal. Years ago I was rather surprised to realize that we kinda just don’t know.
    • pkaye 14 hours ago
      I wonder if there is something like this in the US? As an kidney transplant patient with immunosuppression, I've been super cautious to being in crowds without a mask.

      I feel like something like this might give me more reassurance if I'm meeting friends and family at parties and events without a mask.

    • Nux 15 hours ago
      Does it affect the sense of smell?
      • bbarnett 14 hours ago
        And, an artificial mucus makes me wonder if one feels as if they constantly need to blow their nose?

        Still, neat.

        • xelamonster 14 hours ago
          That was my first thought, sounds uncomfortable. Hopefully you'd just get used it though and to be fair, it's definitely less uncomfortable than dying from preventable diseases.
    • btbuildem 14 hours ago
      Interesting! What are the sensations / side effects?
  • wojciii 14 hours ago
    Or .. you could use salt spray .. the kind of designed for kids. Its just salt and water.

    I stopped using other kinds of spray since discovering that it fixes my sinus infections in a matter of a day or two.

    • hedora 13 hours ago
      Yeah; my doctor recommends neilmed sinus rinse, in the little squirt bottle and powder packet form factor. I keep a gallon of distilled water in the bathroom. Problem solved. (Avoid the maximum strength formulation unless you want to use osmotic pressure to reduce swelling — ouch!)

      If you go for the carbonated mist spray stuff, note that you get a lot less volume of water per dose, so it’s a bit less reliable (but much more convenient since you don’t need to worry about sterilizing anything).

      Regarding the article: Unless you’re using this when completely symptom free (or have some condition where your sinuses are chronically dry), there’s probably already more crap in your sinuses than you need. I’m skeptical of this new technology.

      • quercusa 13 hours ago
        On the other hand, don't think you can get away without the salt packet either. I think that's worse than too much salt.
  • nikolay 13 hours ago
    Such spray [0] has been on the market by multiple brands and is backed by studies [1]. It has a throat spray and lozenges, too. There are some other patented variants with a different type of carrageenan.

    [0]: https://www.carragelose.com/

    [1]: https://www.carragelose.com/en/publications

  • iandanforth 16 hours ago
    I will admit to following the swab-nose-with-neosporin protocol following a previous mouse study with similar results. I use this during travel and have had no short terms ill effects and caught no infections while following it. (Not a doctor, not well controlled, just a random internet guy).

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/research/coronavirus/publicatio...

    • tambourine_man 13 hours ago
      Why not use an N95 mask? I use it on movie theaters, subways and airplanes.
    • ted_dunning 16 hours ago
      That also sounds like a recipe for inducing antibiotic resistance in the staph in your nose.
      • blamazon 15 hours ago
        I'm busy so I didn't read the paper - is there a reason to use neosporin instead of petroleum jelly? In addition to your concern, many people are actively allergic to the ingredients in neosporin.
      • ulbu 15 hours ago
        yes, really, don't do it. it's a danger not only to yourself, but to others as well.
      • CyberDildonics 13 hours ago
        You think putting neosporin in your nose a few times will get someone infected with antibiotic resistant staph?
    • hedora 13 hours ago
      I wouldn’t do that. All sorts of stuff will permanently kill your sense of smell.

      One common one (this keeps getting reinvented, then banned in the us) is zinc nasal spray.

      Zinc lozenges seem fine. Both are effective at shortening colds.

      • nikolay 13 hours ago
        Only if it's zinc acetate, which is rare!
    • scheme271 14 hours ago
      Probably best not to do that. Neosporin is somewhat infamous for causing allergic reactions and repeated use increases the chances of getting an allergy to it.
      • johnohara 13 hours ago
        From the study, to your point:

        > To assess the translational potential of the intranasal neomycin approach in humans, we conducted a small pilot randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving healthy human participants.

        > For the experimental arm (n = 12) > For the placebo arm (n = 7)

        > One out of 21 participants experienced signs of an adverse event after 2 doses which self-resolved after a few days and self-withdrew from the study early. Upon examination of their medical record, it was found that the participant had a history of allergic reactions to various medications (not specific to study drug). Another participant’s nasal samples could not be used due to technical issues. All other 19 participants tolerated the treatment well and did not experience any adverse events from the study.

    • dbreunig 15 hours ago
      Mice != Humans
  • nayroclade 16 hours ago
    When I read about something like this, my first thought is always, is this something we could have evolved ourselves? And if so, what haven’t we? Thicker mucus seems like something we have evolved, so was there some survival trade-off, perhaps in terms of general quality of respiration, that meant we didn’t?
    • syntaxing 16 hours ago
      I forgot what scientist said this but “survival of the fittest” is a misnomer and it’s more about straight up surviving. You need to have tolerable constant pressure for evolutionary traits to propagate. Also, its very possible we already developed thicker mucus than our ancestors millenniums ago.
    • smartmic 15 hours ago
      It is not so long ago since we are exposed to so many different viruses. I think way to less time for evolution to be effective.

      Our ancestors a few thousand years ago still lived in largely isolated, at least not as extremely mobile and transcontinental communities as we do. And in terms of the number of generations, that is so few that we can say we are at the very beginning of an evolutionary development .

    • dinfinity 16 hours ago
      I can imagine this (and thicker mucus in general) negatively affecting olfaction, which is pretty important for survival.
    • biosboiii 16 hours ago
      Evolution isn't nearly as perfect as you think it may be.

      For an example, check your feet.

      • electronbeam 16 hours ago
        I’m looking at them, they’re nice.. be more specific?
        • pcl 14 hours ago
          Routing the plantar nerve around a bunch of ligaments that swell with use seems like a pretty horrible idea, for one!
        • danielbln 15 hours ago
          Yeah, our legs and feet provide a pretty sweet and effective kinetic chain. What's not to love.
          • adrianN 14 hours ago
            They start to hurt around year fifty.
            • tshaddox 13 hours ago
              Hard to blame evolution for that given that reproduction is much rarer after age 50.
    • janice1999 16 hours ago
      We have lots of defenses. Unfortunately viruses evolve a lot faster than we do.
      • throwaway918299 13 hours ago
        And our immune systems evolved before we had airplanes.
  • squillion 14 hours ago
    COVID is airborne, it doesn’t spread via droplets. It’s not clear whether this spray can also block airborne viruses or it only works on droplets.
  • havaloc 15 hours ago
    Shields up: "PCANS forms a gel, increasing its mechanical strength by a hundred times, forming a solid barrier"

    I wonder if it feels unpleasant

  • pulvinar 16 hours ago
    The article doesn't say how the spray affects the sense of smell, which I'd guess it diminishes or blocks. We evolved that sense for good survival reasons.
  • asimpletune 15 hours ago
    I love the elegance of a simple solution like this to solve seemingly much more sophisticated problems.

    This is very good engineering imo.

    • drunkonvinyl 15 hours ago
      Modeled on (and improved) the booger!
  • EwanG 16 hours ago
    In mice, and also using a printed replica of a nasal cavity. It will be a while before we even see human tests, and I'm sort of curious how humans will respond to feeling their noses filled with a gel...
  • OutOfHere 15 hours ago
    The article is useless because it says nothing about what the active ingredients are. The corresponding reference is also equally useless since it's paywalled. Nothing to see here.
    • sampo 13 hours ago
      I think I found the preprint of the article. Of course, the final published article has gone through some further editing. Anyway:

      > To ensure safety during daily or repeated use, PCANS was meticulously designed as a “drug-free” formulation, incorporating biopolymers, surfactants, and alcohols that are listed in the inactive ingredient database (IID) or generally recognized as safe (GRAS) list of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and are present as excipients in commercially available nasal/topical formulations. These components and their unique concentrations were identified via a highly iterative approach aimed at maximizing sprayability, mucoadhesiveness, the capture of respiratory droplets, physical barrier property, pathogen neutralization activity, and nasal residence time.

      > To prepare PCANS, gellan and pectin solutions were mixed in a ratio of 1:1, followed by the addition of tween-80 (Sigma Aldrich). The solution was then supplemented with benzalkonium chloride (BKC) (Sigma Aldrich) and subjected to immediate mixing by pipetting up and down several times. Finally, phenethyl alcohol (Sigma Aldrich) was added, and the pH of the solution was adjusted to 5.5.

      https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.10.02.560602v1....

    • pessimizer 14 hours ago
      You forgot the /s. Or at least I deeply hope you forgot the /s.
  • analog31 16 hours ago
    When I saw "drug-free" the first thing that jumped to mind was a placebo. Which would not have shocked me.
    • phony-account 16 hours ago
      > When I saw "drug-free" the first thing that jumped to mind was a placebo. Which would not have shocked me

      Because people dying of covid are just “imagining it”?

      • analog31 15 hours ago
        I hope you don't think that covid is imaginary.

        The article explains well enough that "drug free" doesn't mean inactive. So it's more a matter of what a "drug" consists of.

        • hedora 13 hours ago
          In this context, “drug-free” should probably be read as “they got permission to skip clinical trials, drug manufacturing oversight, Drug Facts labeling laws, and so on”.
  • idontwantthis 16 hours ago
    > PCANS nasal spray could effectively block infection from an influenza virus (PR8) at 25 times the lethal dose

    A certain amount of influenza virus acts as a toxin and just kills you?

    • jfengel 16 hours ago
      The paper says that 100% of the control group died. (This is a mouse model and a virus specifically selected to be deadly.)

      So, not "toxic", and not the usual LD50 that's often misreported as "lethal". But still, the language seems appropriate.

  • arisAlexis 16 hours ago
    I am using iovir it has some read algae in supposedly does kind of the same thing
    • eth0up 14 hours ago
      As is often the case, I'm unsure why you're d'voted.

      There's a patented nasal product containing a modified carrageenan which has had substantially beneficial results in many subjects. When coupled with various (non-prescription/natural) anti-xyz ingredients, it can be really effective.

      I've been making my own nasal formula for over 8 years, which I discovered 7 years ago has been patented by one of the big pharmas. It works.

      There's a lot of potential here, and algae is definitely on the list.

  • gwbas1c 16 hours ago
    > They have not studied PCANS directly in humans

    Stopped reading there. As promising as it sounds, I'll be a lot more interested when this is a product that's proven to work.

    (Joke) Wake me when the human studies are done

    • GordonS 16 hours ago
      The article doesn't even say how long the protection lasts for, or mention a single one of the ingredients by name. Doesn't really give the reader much to go on :-/
  • magicmicah85 15 hours ago
    While cool, studies like this always remind me that we deliberately breed and infect animals to see if they suffer and die from the disease or the cure.

    No need to remind me that without this we wouldn’t have all our medical advancements, it’s just a sad footnote to all of modern medicine, that’s all.