Thread: Coronavirus - II

1. Re: Coronavirus - II

I think that's somewhat misleading.

Studies have been done concerning how far droplets travel when sneezing/coughing when masks are worn/not worn. The data is in and is clear that masks, even the crappiest ones, help stop a certain amount (even 10% less is helpful) of particles.

As far as studying if an infected person was wearing a mask when they got infected... I'd say that's less conspiracy and more practical challenges. Do you know what you were doing every minute for the past 2+ weeks? It takes exposure, incubation (up to 2 weeks), symptoms, testing, confirmation, and THEN contact tracing.

Even the n95 (which you don't hear much about anymore) is just that, 95% effective. You can also buy n100/p100 masks, which are 99+% effective. But there's still a probability that something can/will get past them.

This is a math problem as far as the spreading goes and a social science problem from behavior standpoint. I'd take someone wearing a crappy droopy mask over no mask at all anyday.

2. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by turbodog
I think that's somewhat misleading.

Studies have been done concerning how far droplets travel when sneezing/coughing when masks are worn/not worn. The data is in and is clear that masks, even the crappiest ones, help stop a certain amount (even 10% less is helpful) of particles.

As far as studying if an infected person was wearing a mask when they got infected... I'd say that's less conspiracy and more practical challenges. Do you know what you were doing every minute for the past 2+ weeks? It takes exposure, incubation (up to 2 weeks), symptoms, testing, confirmation, and THEN contact tracing.

Even the n95 (which you don't hear much about anymore) is just that, 95% effective. You can also buy n100/p100 masks, which are 99+% effective. But there's still a probability that something can/will get past them.

This is a math problem as far as the spreading goes and a social science problem from behavior standpoint. I'd take someone wearing a crappy droopy mask over no mask at all anyday.
If a crappy mask absorbs the virus laced droplets and keeps them there so the mask wearer can breath them in and spew them right back out at others then what good is it doing? Until I see a study on how many are infected while using masks I still wonder if most masks aren't helping much at all perhaps even increasing the risk of infections as they give a platform for the virus to survive that may be a lot better than a flat or dry surface a moist mask may be a nice breeding ground for the virus. In other words if someone you knew that had the virus gave you their mask to use.... would you use it?

3. Re: Coronavirus - II

Viruses don’t “breed”. They aren’t even alive. They only function in a host cell. And if you’re the only one wearing your mask (as it should be) you’d only be breathing in what you already exhaled, so you’re not going to “extra infect” yourself. That’s not a thing.

4. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by nbp
Viruses don’t “breed”. They aren’t even alive. They only function in a host cell. And if you’re the only one wearing your mask (as it should be) you’d only be breathing in what you already exhaled, so you’re not going to “extra infect” yourself. That’s not a thing.
I shouldn't have mistakenly said "breed". So if someone spews virus into the air and your mask "grabs" the droplets you are saying that you cannot suck the moisture that includes the virus through the mask when you breathe in? That virus that is now on/in your mask cannot be blown back out into the air again? I believe this is quite possible with a lot of cheap masks out there.

5. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
I shouldn't have mistakenly said "breed". So if someone spews virus into the air and your mask "grabs" the droplets you are saying that you cannot suck the moisture that includes the virus through the mask when you breathe in? That virus that is now on/in your mask cannot be blown back out into the air again? I believe this is quite possible with a lot of cheap masks out there.
That is not at all what he said.
EDIT: And his statement was absolutely correct!

6. Re: Coronavirus - II

If the mask caught your spit globs the first time why wouldn’t it catch it the second time? It’s not a perfect solution but I think the idea is if you can decrease the amount of mucus flying around by any amount that is helpful. Once again, remember the mask is not there to catch the aerosolized viral particles from OTHERS, it’s to catch the goo flying out of YOUR face.

7. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by nbp
If the mask caught your spit globs the first time why wouldn’t it catch it the second time? It’s not a perfect solution but I think the idea is if you can decrease the amount of mucus flying around by any amount that is helpful. Once again, remember the mask is not there to catch the aerosolized viral particles from OTHERS, it’s to catch the goo flying out of YOUR face.
Do you know that they recommend that a damp mask be changed? I bet 90% of the people wearing masks aren't changing them when they get damp. Someone that is infected could turn away when they cough and sneeze and the virus may go somewhere that nobody will pick them up on their mask but if they load their mask up with the virus and cough or sneeze it is concentrated there in their mask to be spewed out perhaps even a higher concentration than a single high output blast you have a mask full of a lot of breathing in/out.

8. Re: Coronavirus - II

Everyone keep in mind that lynx_arc is talking about some of the low quality or junk masks. In that case what he is saying is actually correct. A paper mask that gets damp oror contaminated is useless.

9. Re: Coronavirus - II

Then don’t wear a mask and just breathe the particle laden air in if you want to; it doesn’t matter to me. But I don’t think your theories about superconcentrated viral air from masks really hold water scientifically. I would be fascinated to read peer reviewed scientific literature to the contrary however.

10. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by nbp
Then don’t wear a mask and just breathe the particle laden air in if you want to; it doesn’t matter to me. But I don’t think your theories about superconcentrated viral air from masks really hold water scientifically. I would be fascinated to read peer reviewed scientific literature to the contrary however.
If you wear a paper mask for more than a few minutes just your breath will dampen that mask. I really think/hope that’s the point he is trying to get across

11. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by bigburly912
If you wear a paper mask for more than a few minutes just your breath will dampen that mask. I really think/hope that’s the point he is trying to get across
Exactly..... we know that N95 masks don't have these issues.... but I've read papers today to hospital staffs that say that when one of their masks gets damp to change it and there is way way too many cheap masks and I bet most people don't change them when they get damp so they could be either useless or possibly worse than not wearing a mask.

12. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by bigburly912
If you wear a paper mask for more than a few minutes just your breath will dampen that mask. I really think/hope that’s the point he is trying to get across
I've seen some blatantly staged images of people wearing coffee filters, but otherwise what I see around me is sewn masks, surgical masks, simple respirators, valved respirators - all in reasonable working order at a glance. Valved respirators get some finger-wagging in some quarters, but the industry has seemingly refused to address the relatively simple airflow problem that eyewear reveals when it fogs, so I can't fault that choice.

13. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by nbp
Then don’t wear a mask and just breathe the particle laden air in if you want to; it doesn’t matter to me. But I don’t think your theories about superconcentrated viral air from masks really hold water scientifically. I would be fascinated to read peer reviewed scientific literature to the contrary however.
I would love to see some non partisan, non political, non biased studies on masks and transmission of the virus that includes all sorts of masks and conditions including cheap, disposable, home made masks instead of relying on N95 data which I believe is what a lot of quoted statistics are based upon.

14. Re: Coronavirus - II

I don’t even know where to begin with that...

Follow your local government mandates and take care.

15. Re: Coronavirus - II

Reaching quite a bit now brother.

16. Re: Coronavirus - II

I just googled a few things and saw mention of recommending "not singing" in churches even with masks on. I didn't bother checking in depth into it but it seems to suggest that masks aren't doing well when the virus "load" is higher as in singing etc. One mayor is trying to ban singing in churches totally. Not quite sure what to make of it all but I do recall hearing about a bunch of people in a choir getting the virus awhile back but I don't think they were masked overall (not sure).

17. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
I would love to see some non partisan, non political, non biased studies on masks and transmission of the virus that includes all sorts of masks and conditions including cheap, disposable, home made masks instead of relying on N95 data which I believe is what a lot of quoted statistics are based upon.
Controlled studies in this field are vanishingly rare since all the money is in therapy and vaccine development. There are plenty of generic studies long predating COVID-19 that demonstrate the efficacy of various filter media - included improvised media such as simple cloth - at greatly reducing the spread of water droplets from coughs and sneezes in terms of both quantity transmitted as well as their escape velocity. And that's the name of the game - reduction at multiple levels vis-a-vis social distancing and everyone that can wear a mask wearing one, doubling the opportunities for interception.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
As for the superconcentrated viral air....
Yeah, not sure where to go with that either. Walking around without a mask in close proximity to a carrier does the same means you're rolling the dice on exposure being sufficiently brief that you don't catch sufficient load to incubate an infection because every exhalation into the local air will be loaded to maximum potential viral load. Masks cut into this since water droplets are larger than the nitrogen, oxygen, CO2 that's most of the air. Unless the mask is dripping wet, loaded with particulates to the point that it has to be bypassed to breathe, or otherwise been rendered ineffective it's going to have very good odds of intercepting and containing the droplets that viral particles ride within, thus reduce exposure. Water droplets also tend to be wicked into the material and over time can evaporate, leaving behind dissolved/suspended contents such as virus particles which I gather are rapidly inactivated in the process.

Or, you know, just listen to what public health authorities have to say.

18. Re: Coronavirus - II

Please be mindful of the previous advisement.

Originally Posted by Empath
Take ALL posts regarding the presently occurring protests, riots, marches and such to The Underground.
At least one post has been removed, due to efforts to direct the discussion in the wrong direction.

19. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Dave D
I think you are getting confused with the David Hasselhoff movie 'Bridge Across Time'!

There were no murders attributed to Jack the Ripper under London Bridge, but such a myth probably helps to generate visitors!
Does it really matter?

20. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
I shouldn't have mistakenly said "breed". So if someone spews virus into the air and your mask "grabs" the droplets you are saying that you cannot suck the moisture that includes the virus through the mask when you breathe in? That virus that is now on/in your mask cannot be blown back out into the air again? I believe this is quite possible with a lot of cheap masks out there.
The virus exited your body most likely during a cough/sneeze, not nearly as much during normal respiration. So unless you cough/sneeze in REVERSE it's most likely going to stay adhered to the mask surface/fibers.

Remember. this is a math thing. There's no 100% guarantee, but you can tip the odds in your favor any manner of ways.

21. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
Exactly..... we know that N95 masks don't have these issues.... but I've read papers today to hospital staffs that say that when one of their masks gets damp to change it and there is way way too many cheap masks and I bet most people don't change them when they get damp so they could be either useless or possibly worse than not wearing a mask.
Technically _any_ mask become damp when your very first exhale hits it. It's a matter of how wet is too wet?

And many of those papers are 'best practices'. However faced with reality, a lot of those get adjusted into 'allowable practices'. Which is a nice way of saying that a compromised mask is still better than no mask.

22. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
I would love to see some non partisan, non political, non biased studies on masks and transmission of the virus that includes all sorts of masks and conditions including cheap, disposable, home made masks instead of relying on N95 data which I believe is what a lot of quoted statistics are based upon.
I understand what you are saying, but you are making a false assumption that the mask, when hit with a blast of air, readily gives up it's entire filtering load. This is simply false.

And in practice, it's a reach anyway. If you are coughing/sneezing, prudence would have a responsible person staying at home.

Also, in practice, if someone feels this coming on, they will hopefully take a few extra steps away from other people.

If you're looking for an excuse to NOT wear a mask, even a homemade one, you will not find it based on facts.

23. Re: Coronavirus - II

The public health officials got us into this mess, I tend to see it as putting clowns in charge of pie allocation expecting people to all have a nice piece of pie and expecting no mess at all. We have gone from controlling the virus to fears of death if you don't mask and mandatory measures if we don't STOP the virus. No more controlling and managing... STOPPING and avoiding death are the key words now and supported by the health authorities.. fearmongering and they wonder why the younger folk are now rebelling that is because they have lost respect for health authorities too.

24. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
The public health officials got us into this mess, <SNIP>
I'm in NJ, in the New York City Metropolitan area.

We were the epicenter for the US.

Fortunately for me, The Governors of NY, NJ, and Connecticut, worked together to get the virus under control. It was raging for a month, and there were REAL scares as hospitals became filled over-capacity, there was no effective treatment, a severe lack of PPEs, and ventilators. Thankfully, the curve flattened out, and after a few weeks of being relatively flat (at an obscenely high level) it started downward.

Gov. Cuomo, of NY, took the lead, as NYC got hit the hardest, and first. NJ (the most densely populated state in the nation) and Connecticut were only a couple of weeks behind.

Back in April, I recall my brother saying to me; "notice, they are not talking about STOPPING the virus, they are only talking about SLOWING the virus, so as to not incapacitate the hospitals."

Fortunately, people in the tri-state area, for the most part, stayed in when told to, and for the most part respected social distancing, at least enough for the new case numbers, and hospitalizations to drop to a manageable level.

So I would say that we had good leadership, and a populace that co-operated.

I recall when I was in my late teens, and early to mid twenties. They were the most socially active/care free times of my life.
I understand why people in that age group, have a much stronger, need/desire than those in my age group, to socialize.
Hopefully they are paying attention to the rising rate of infection, and that it is hitting their age group, and see that hospitals are maxing out.
Hopefully, they'll cut back on socialization, and feel the need to participate in decreasing the rate of spread.

Hopefully.

25. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
The public health officials got us into this mess, I tend to see it as putting clowns in charge of pie allocation expecting people to all have a nice piece of pie and expecting no mess at all. We have gone from controlling the virus to fears of death if you don't mask and mandatory measures if we don't STOP the virus. No more controlling and managing... STOPPING and avoiding death are the key words now and supported by the health authorities.. fearmongering and they wonder why the younger folk are now rebelling that is because they have lost respect for health authorities too.
We all got ourselves into this mess every single time we go somewhere not essential, don't wear a mask, don't wash hands thoroughly, talk more than we should, and stay longer than required.

In the book I just finished, the death of expertise, it has an entire chapter about the difference in experts explaining current events and predicting future ones. The US had a chance, a very very very very small one, to stop the virus. That ball was fumbled. Now we are trying to hold the opposing team to as few touchdowns as possible.

Ask yourself how far along toward the 'end' of this we are, barring a vaccine, how far toward herd immunity. A large majority of 'people on the street' that I deal with think we are pretty far along, certainly past the worst of it. The numbers and the medical professionals in my immediate family (MD, DO, NP, RN, BSN, MHS) all agree we are maybe 5% through this ordeal... that we are still in the EARLY beginning phases.

Now ask yourself, if you are trying to communicate vital information to the public, how you handle it all, knowing that you get one shot. You have to deal with PPE issues, testing issues, legal issues, job issues, tax revenue issues, deficit issues, paranoia, bad info from the white house, manpower shortages due to 14 day 'time outs', and other countless things.

The younger/all folk have lost respect for expertise largely due to MISinformation from the myriad of sources that tell them exactly what they want to hear. Today, no matter how crazy your ideas, you can find websites, blogs, podcasts, etc that agree with you, that play directly into your confirmation bias. 20+ years ago, there were fewer news sources... if you listened to the news you were presented with ideas that did NOT match your worldview... that's not the case in the modern 'news' business.

26. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by Lynx_Arc
The public health officials got us into this mess
You know all those horrific early projections that the media ran with in February/March - one million or more dead, hospitals in triage for months with people dying in waiting rooms? In no small part the actions of public health officials are why that fearmongering - i.e. early projections - fell short.

27. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by idleprocess
You know all those horrific early projections that the media ran with in February/March - one million or more dead, hospitals in triage for months with people dying in waiting rooms? In no small part the actions of public health officials are why that fearmongering - i.e. early projections - fell short.
Yes. Public health is tough. If you get it _right_ you look _wrong_.

That said... every piece of data I see points to over 1M dead in the US. Is just going to take longer to get there. I've not lost anyone I know yet, but have clients that have lost people they know.

28. Re: Coronavirus - II

now im broke as a joke i had to get more mask it took my last farking dime. then i get home read reviews and they suck. id thought they would be regulated

29. Re: Coronavirus - II

Sorry man. The medical grade are 'regulated'. Certified might be a better word to use. The non-medical grade are labelled just that way, non-medical. Usefulness is not as good as medical. Some are better than others. ALL are better than nothing.

Don't forget that masks are not a silver bullet. Everyone needs to stay several feet apart, be careful, stay home if sick, do not touch your face/eyes, and WASH HANDS.

30. Re: Coronavirus - II

Originally Posted by turbodog
Sorry man. The medical grade are 'regulated'. Certified might be a better word to use. The non-medical grade are labelled just that way, non-medical. Usefulness is not as good as medical. Some are better than others. ALL are better than nothing.

Don't forget that masks are not a silver bullet. Everyone needs to stay several feet apart, be careful, stay home if sick, do not touch your face/eyes, and WASH HANDS.
i stay far away from everyone if they dont have a mask on i wont even walk down the aisle there on. i use hand cleaner even before i go in store. then when i leave i use hand cleaner again to take off my mask..im germ phobic for sure

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•