The physiological, perceptual, and thermoregulatory responses to facemask use during exercise: a review.

The use of masks in public settings and when around people has been recommended to limit the spread of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by major public health agencies. Several different types of masks classified as either medical- or non-medical grade are commonly used among the public. However, concerns with difficulty breathing, re-breathing exhaled carbon dioxide, a decrease in arterial oxygen saturation, and a decrease in exercise performance have been raised regarding the use of mask during exercise. We review the current knowledge related to the effect of different masks during exercise on cardiorespiratory, metabolic, thermoregulatory, and perceptual responses. As such, the current literature seems to suggest that there are minimal changes to cardiovascular, metabolic, and no changes to thermoregulatory parameters with facemask use. However, differences in ventilatory parameters have been reported with submaximal and maximal intensity exercise to volitional fatigue. Literature on perceptual responses to exercise indicate an impact on ratings of perceived exertion, dyspnea, and overall discomfort dependent on mask use as well as exercise intensity. In conclusion, data from the current literature suggests a minimal impact on physiological, perceptual, and thermoregulatory responses dependent on the type of mask used during exercise.

Implicating effector genes at COVID-19 GWAS loci using promoter-focused Capture-C in disease-relevant immune cell types.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection results in a broad spectrum of COVID-19 disease, from mild or no symptoms to hospitalization and death. COVID-19 disease severity has been associated with some pre-existing conditions and the magnitude of the adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2, and a recent genome-wide association study (GWAS) of the risk of critical illness revealed a significant genetic component. To gain insight into how human genetic variation attenuates or exacerbates disease following SARS-CoV-2 infection, we implicated putatively functional COVID risk variants in the cis-regulatory landscapes of human immune cell types with established roles in disease severity and used high-resolution chromatin conformation capture to map these disease-associated elements to their effector genes. RESULTS: This functional genomic approach implicates 16 genes involved in viral replication, the interferon response, and inflammation. Several of these genes (PAXBP1, IFNAR2, OAS1, OAS3, TNFAIP8L1, GART) were differentially expressed in immune cells from patients with severe versus moderate COVID-19 disease, and we demonstrate a previously unappreciated role for GART in T cell-dependent antibody-producing B cell differentiation in a human tonsillar organoid model. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers immunogenetic insight into the basis of COVID-19 disease severity and implicates new targets for therapeutics that limit SARS-CoV-2 infection and its resultant life-threatening inflammation.