Masks

CertifiedSimp

Interesting to note the differences in support for O'Callaghans anti BLM post and anti mandatory masks march.

3k likes for the BLM post.

23k for the anti mask one.

Hypocrites.

GT89

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

That "joke" has worn very thin at this stage.

Just like covid 1984 so

Tenzor07

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

What is the effectiveness of masks?
If 100 people in a supermarket wear masks and 100 in another supermarket don't, what is the number of cases prevented of those 100?

Not exactly scientific at all but interesting none the less...


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-25/this-starbucks-in-south-korea-became-a-beacon-for-mask-wearing?

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Not exactly scientific at all but interesting none the less...


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-25/this-starbucks-in-south-korea-became-a-beacon-for-mask-wearing?

Wonder do they wear eye protection as well or are masks enough?

Seanergy

Yes: valved

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

What is the effectiveness of masks?

If 100 people in a supermarket wear masks and 100 in another supermarket don't, what is the number of cases prevented of those 100?

This type of data must be there if they made a decision based on data

As pointed out, way too many variables to carry out a study similar to the one your suggesting, just to name a few, people's fitness levels, breathing habits(mouth breathers V's nose breathers) etc.

From an Irish perspective the only data we have on the effectiveness of masks regarding COVID-19 is when all HCW's and essential workers in LTR's/nursing homes donned them.

see post #7034

odyssey06

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

If the data isn't there how can our CMO the data wasn't there months ago but they now say to wear masks so obviously they must have data.

Of course they have data but they don't have the specific data that you originally queried and I replied to.

They have data from:
* Comparative data between countries based on mask wearing
* Comparative data between US states based on mask wearing, including the same US states before and after mask policies changed
* Data from case studies where infected people (hairdressers, flight passengers) wearing surgical masks did not infect any of their close contacts
* Data from laboratory studies showing the effectiveness of masks at reducing emission of droplets
* Data from when more general mask wearing policies were rolled out in health and care settings here
* Data showing that people with covid-19 are highly infectious just before they start to show symptoms

This article summarises the data explaining why the US CDC changed their guidance on masks:
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

ShineOn7

Yes: surgical

What's everyone using to tighten up the fit of their mask?

My head is smaller than I thought

washman3

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Interesting to note the differences in support for O'Callaghans anti BLM post and anti mandatory masks march.

3k likes for the BLM post.

23k for the anti mask one.

Hypocrites.

Wish Gareth a speedy recovery.
When he's better lets hope he finds the strength to send a message to the Clifden Cartel.

wadacrack

Yes: to protect myself and others

https://twitter.com/tinssoldier/status/1298101693247193089

odyssey06

ShineOn7 wrote: »

What's everyone using to tighten up the fit of their mask? My head is smaller than I thought

A headshrinker?

I am using the blue surgical masks and I press the metal strip around the nose. The loops are elasticated.
Haven't had that issue, actually might be a little too snug sometimes.
(Now worried I may have a big head)

odyssey06

The Starbucks story was mentioned earlier in the thread but I think it's too soon to assign it just to masks.
For example, there might be a staff specific toilet and it could be the customer toilet was the source of the infection.

This is common setup in many food establishments for general hygiene reasons, nothing to do with covid19.

wadacrack

Yes: to protect myself and others

odyssey06 wrote: »

The Starbucks story was mentioned earlier in the thread but I think it's too soon to assign it just to masks.
For example, there might be a staff specific toilet and it could be the customer toilet was the source of the infection.

This is common setup in many food establishments for general hygiene reasons, nothing to do with covid19.

Thats a pretty random assumption.Source of infection is highly likely to be where the person spent 2 hours which was inside the starbucks store not the bathroom. Masks highly likely to have helped the employee's avoid infection

weldoninhio

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

extra gravy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/GarethOCal/status/1297486070557351936?s=19

Not sure if posted already. Message to the anti mask idiots from someone with a serious illness.

Someone needs to tell him that wearing a mask doesn't protect the wearer.

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

Someone needs to tell him that wearing a mask doesn't protect the wearer.

All the more reason for everyone else to wear a mask.

odyssey06

wadacrack wrote: »

Thats a pretty random assumption.Source of infection is highly likely to be where the person spent 2 hours which was inside the starbucks store not the bathroom. Masks highly likely to have helped the employee's avoid infection

Well, it wasn't an assumption. It was an example of difference.
I mentioned toilet facilities as a specific example where employee and customer exposure is different.
Duration doesn't matter if they picked up the infection via contact of a surface.

I think at this stage it is an assumption to assign the results to masks without a clearer picture of what other such differences there are in exposure e.g. ventilation, staff locations, screens etc
The below article mentions the infected person was sat next to an air conditioner (not ventilated). It could be down to direction of air flow.

Also, the article doesn't say what type of masks were worn.
Most masks eg surgical type masks are primarily about blocking droplets from an infected person NOT directly protecting the wearer.

So at this stage, I wouldn't be ruling masks out but I wouldn't be ruling masks in as the reason. We need more info.

https://www.businessinsider.com/56-got-coronavirus-south-korea-starbucks-mask-wearers-did-not-2020-8?r=US&IR=T

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

weldoninhio wrote: »

Someone needs to tell him that wearing a mask doesn't protect the wearer.

That's his whole point. We need to wear masks to protect others.

patnor1011

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Even kids know that something isnt right
https://twitter.com/i/status/1297209884644179970

weldoninhio

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

That's his whole point. We need to wear masks to protect others.

"I wear a mask to protect myself against idiots"

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

"I wear a mask to protect myself against idiots"

Makes sense, much more protection if "the idiots" also wear a mask.

I suspect that was the point of the tweet.

Graham

patnor1011 wrote: »

Even kids know that something isnt right

Proof if it were needed that we have a certain cohort acting like 2 year olds. :pac:

Sconsey

No: other

weldoninhio wrote: »

"I wear a mask to protect myself against idiots"

In this case idiots are the anti-mask brigade and idiots that are happy to lie about fabricated illnesses to avoid the hassle of wearing masks. Idiots. Does that sound like anyone you know?

saneman

Yes: surgical

washman3 wrote: »

I know exactly what they are. Have been wearing them for years on end at work. Safely can say that i may know more about them than many here.
When i hear someone suggest that a piece of cloth covering your nose and mouth will prevent a virus one millionth of a millimeter from passing through, i don't know whether to laugh or cry. Forget about this 'virus in droplet guff..!!

The only mask that may be in any way viable is the surgical type used in operating theatres, but those are only effective in such environments, which are sterile and single use only. Do you ever see a surgeon wearing one walking around a hospital.
Would love to check and see what some of you folks round here were 'experts' on a year ago....;)

Well if "guff" means overwhelming scientific & medical consensus, then sorry, you're correct.

Apart from air-fed systems, medical grade FFP3, FFP2 (& N99/N95 equivilants) offer the best protection in clinical settings. Surgical masks (if EN14683:2019 Type II) to a lesser extent and following that minimal risk 3-ply surgical-type masks. Face coverings offer the least protective benefit but that does not mean they offer no protection. And that benefit would be cumulative when used in conjunction with hand washing & social distancing. Many also have the added benefit of being washable & reusable.

The WHO used the term "mechanistic plausibility" in a 2019 report on the protective benefits of mask use by the public during an influenza pandemic (c-19 has very similar modes of transmission). This was inferred by those experts based on the benefits shown from clinical studies in laboratory environments and was in relation to protecting the wearer. Further evidence has since emerged on the protective benefits to others should the wearer be the one infected

The strong evidence is there but will never be 100% conclusive, there is no way to study the myriad of environments in which masks may be used. We're talking about a (despite what others seem to believe) non-harmful method of intervention and I don't understand why those who still doubt their efficacy wouldn't prefer to err on the side of caution.

washman3 wrote: »

Give us your explanation so.!!
And while you're at it explain why there wasn't sufficient and proper PPE for our Frontline staff when they needed it most, and also why we bought plane loads of duds from China while they themselves were buying their own from Korea.
15 years PPE industry experience means you should have no problem explaining this.

In the early stages China effectively halted exports of PPE manufactured within it borders (it refuted this but a record number “force majeure” certificates were issued to allow it's companies to break existing contracts) and also used its purchasing power to buy up stock from global suppliers. It also receivied large donations of PPE from the likes of the US at a time when the WHO was highlighting global shortages. Manufacturers & suppliers, including the major names in the global market, were reliant on Chinese production and scrambled to find alternate sources as they found out that their facilities were not in fact their facilities.

As demand within China decreased and export bans lifted the market was flooded with excess PPE, an appreciable amount of it did not meet required specifications/quality standards, or indeed was countefieit (I came across this personally, reviewing PPE samples accompanied with what turned out to be a forged European compliance cert). Demand around the globe had gone into overdrive at that stage, exacerbated by the actions of other nations, such as Trump's use of the Defence Production Act to ensure American PPE manufacturers (i.e. the biggest ones, Honeywell, 3M, Moldex) supplied to the US only. Those with the deepest pockets were outbidding, & effectively hijacking, shipments of masks and other PPE destined elsewhere.

Here, as in other countries, there weren't adequate PPE stockpiles available for healthcare staff for a pandemic episode, at least not for any great length of time. That's down to poor planning, and the expectation that PPE would be readily available from the usual supplier base (at that point it wasn't, see above). HSE procurement pulled the trigger on large PPE orders, sight unseen, and an act of desperation at that stage. And they weren't on their own, again that was a glogbal issue. I'm sure there were procurements officers sweating until the point their orders arrived and were inspection/validated, there was ceratinly enough "duds" received to warrant investigations into the processes involved.

ShineOn7

Yes: surgical

Usain Bolt tests positive for coronavirus days after maskless birthday celebration

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/usain-bolt-tests-positive-for-covid-19

Seanergy

Yes: valved

washman3 wrote: »

When i hear someone suggest that a piece of cloth covering your nose and mouth will prevent a virus one millionth of a millimeter from passing through, i don't know whether to laugh or cry. Forget about this 'virus in droplet guff..!!

The only mask that may be in any way viable is the surgical type used in operating theatres, but those are only effective in such environments, which are sterile and single use only. Do you ever see a surgeon wearing one walking around a hospital.

Would be alot more helpful if you would choose a particle size and stick with it. Seen zero covid-19 evidence that the virus is viable at one millionth of a millimeter.

Surgical masks are not made to a 0.1 µm spec. Majority of surgical masks are made to a 0.6 µm spec. They are deisgned to filter bacteria from the wearer dropping into an open body part during surgery, not to prevent spread walking around the hospital, hence their name. They were never designed to reduce/prevent virus transmission but they can help reduce spread.

It's only the 0.3 µm's that do not travel in a straight line. KN95's spec to a 0.3 µm, 95% effective with 0.3 µm particle's. It's the electrically charged meltblown that does the magic on the non straight traveling particle's by magnetically drawing them into contact.

Currently in Ireland HSE advice continues to be covid-19 is transmitted by droplet only = 10 µm and larger.

McGiver

No: I don't care enough

Alright, I see the IAB (Irish anti-mask brigade) are still on it. God/Mother nature/Universe bless their numbers are diminished day by day.

Elsewhere in reality, Czechia is reintroducing universal mandatory masks both indoors and outdoors (TBC) from the 1st September.

This is a reaction to a) schools reopening and b) the second wave which occurred following loosening the restrictions at the end of June. Number of daily cases are now equivalent to what they were during the April peak.

mirrorwall14

Yes: valved

Seanergy wrote: »

Sounds like your trying to do the best you can, you'd have my blessing to proceed all things considered. Yes generally valved masks contribute to the atmosphere more than non valved but don't forget so do badly fitting masks and visors with no masks.

How one contributes to the communal air has not been discussed, many on this thread have been hopping for proper state wide education for months now.

If I was returning to secondary school as a teacher I would face the debate face on. It's going to be playing on the minds of your students and yourself so adress the elephant in the room, otherwise very little is going to be taught or absorbed.

If your going to remain consious of your contributuion why not get your classroom a hepa filter fan and a CO2 monitor. The CO2 monitor (150euro) will give you a guide for when the air in the class is not refreshing quick enough, the hepa filter will aid cleaning the air that does not get a chance to escape. Some excellent low budget DIY HEPA filter fans can be constructed for 100-200 euro(that price would include afew filters). Enough of the kids and their parents do not want their children contracting or spreading the virus so maybe everyone can chip in, get them to bring notes home from day 1. Big knock on effect with that sort of approach.

Have you tried the KN95's without the valve?

Thank you I appreciate the detail. Unfortunately, I'm a second level teacher so I am on the move and in many rooms even if I was to stand with my back up against the board I'm still going to be 1m from my students. Our rooms are absolutely packed and I teach four groups who will have 30 students in the room, four with 27. Luckily the other groups are smaller.

I've ordered contact lenses for a better mask fit (I have a hearing aid and glasses too!) and I'll give the n95 a go thanks

GT89

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

McGiver wrote: »

Alright, I see the IAB (Irish anti-mask brigade) are still on it. God/Mother nature/Universe bless their numbers are diminished day by day.

Elsewhere in reality, Czechia is reintroducing universal mandatory masks both indoors and outdoors (TBC) from the 1st September.

This is a reaction to a) schools reopening and b) the second wave which occurred following loosening the restrictions at the end of June. Number of daily cases are now equivalent to what they were during the April peak.

Where's the ICU admissions and deaths. Okay it's mostly effecting younger and less at risk people but back in March the lockdown brigade now rebranded the mask brigade were telling us that there were younger people dying and being admitted to ICU also were they lying back in March or are they lying now?

i_surge

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

If the masks are as good as he says, he shouldn't care what others do so, it would be their decision like smoking or drinking

Unlike smoking and drinking which are personal risk, this is different, individual behaviour affects community risk.

The innocent suffer from the ignorant behaviour of others.

(Why oh why should i even have to explain the obvious?)

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

GT89 wrote: »

Where's the ICU admissions and deaths. Okay it's mostly effecting younger and less at risk people but back in March the lockdown brigade now rebranded the mask brigade were telling us that there were younger people dying and being admitted to ICU also were they lying back in March or are they lying now?

Back in March we were reading people in China were dropping dead in the streets from Covid.

More bull.

GT89

No: I will wait for the HSE to recommend

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Back in March we were reading people in China were dropping dead in the streets from Covid.

More bull.

Exactly they were telling they were dropping like flies in China and later Italy it's clear it isn't very deadly to 99.9% of people. Time to get back to the old normal which was flawed too but better than this new normal bs and get on with our lives and forget about covid 1984.