Masks

Wibbs

Yes: other

Another look into the effectiveness of masks in public places.

For example, in Hong Kong, only four confirmed deaths due to COVID-19 have been recorded since the beginning of the pandemic, despite high density, mass transportation, and proximity to Wuhan. Hong Kong’s health authorities credit their citizens’ near-universal mask-wearing as a key factor (surveys show almost 100 percent voluntary compliance). Similarly, Taiwan ramped up mask production early on and distributed masks to the population, mandating their use in public transit and recommending their use in other public places — a recommendation that has been widely complied with. The country continues to function fully, and their schools have been open since the end of February, while their death total remains very low, at only six. In the Czech Republic, masks were not used during the initial outbreak, but after a grassroots campaign led to a government mandate on March 18, masks in public became ubiquitous. The results took a while to be reflected in the official statistics: The first five days of April still saw an average of 257 new cases and nine deaths per day, but the most recent five days of data show an average of 120 new cases and five deaths per day. Of course, we can’t know for sure to what degree these success stories are due to masks, but we do know that in every region that has adopted widespread mask-wearing, case and death rates have been reduced within a few weeks.

Wibbs

Yes: other

Given the way people seem to be getting complacent and relaxing personal restrictions IMHO one of the only ways to help stop the spread and get our country back up and running again are masks in publicly shared indoor spaces.

Boggles

Wibbs wrote: »

Given the way people seem to be getting complacent and relaxing personal restrictions IMHO one of the only ways to help stop the spread and get our country back up and running again are masks in publicly shared indoor spaces.

Indeed Wibbs.

Had to run a few errands earlier, place is absolutely mobbed.

The majority on top of each other.

Absolute fúcking muppetery.

Mr.Wemmick

Yes: homemade

Coralcoras wrote: »

Sister works in a pharmacy where a covid19 positive client (in his 40s) walked into the shop and up to the counter without a mask! That’s what we are dealing with - never mind the asymptotic folks! IMO we all should be wearing them.

Have since thrown together cloth masks for her as stock is limited for her. Took a couple of tries to get it snug.

Used three layers (quilters cloth/non woven interface/quilters cloth). Just about breathable.

It take me about an hour to cut and sew them and insert an aluminium bar in a special pocket, so I’d be wary of any cheap ones being sold online.. must be just one layer of loosely woven polycotten ��

If buying fabrics, perhaps choose a nice friendly colourful fabric. My dark solid coloured ones are quite imposing. Also decided to have a light colour for inside layer against mouth, so there would be no mistaking the ‘not-to-be-touched’ side when handling it.

Can I ask what you've used for the non-woven fabric in the centre of the mask?

I have some breathable polypropylene here but not quite sure of its weight/filtering levels and I have ordered 3 layered breathable bamboo pillow covers anti allergy/ dust, anti-bacteria and hoping they will be a good non woven alternative for the centre.

I agree re: hand made masks and I am about to make some for the elderly relatives who will not stay in and fail to keep the correct distance when talking to folks.

Seanergy

Yes: valved

dfx- wrote: »

That is a preference though. The only risk-free way of dealing with this is for everyone not to go out until there is a vaccine and everyone gets it.

UK Government scientific advisor just on BBC News describing the value of masks for key workers but that it swings the other way for the general public.

Sorry but everyone not going out until there is a vacine is still not a risk free way, people need food and essentials brought to their shelters with this brings risk.

dfx- wrote: »

Come on Wibbs. That doesn't help.

It's based on length of exposure for a key worker working all day with people at a checkout or bus driver and someone going to the shops for ten minutes.

There are virologists advising the government, actual experts. The Deputy CMO is a specialist in pandemics for 25 years.

Come on dfx, that UKGSA hasn't a rats! I'm all in favour of wisdom but length of term is not a qualification. IMHO if he is advising government for that length of time, he is not a virologist/scientist he is a politican.

He's jumping on the ould evidence based repeated argument trending/circulating that the untrained mask user is more of a risk to themselves wearing a mask than not wearing a mask. I saw a beautiful counter to this argument in the comments section(reply to comment8) on this masks article. I will power grab it for you here.

COMMENTER: Think about gerneral public who puts on the same mask day after day, wanders around a supermarket sucking up air, repeatedly takes the mask off, regularly touches his hands to the front of the mask where all that he has inhaled is accumulating, and then rubs his eyes. Is this mask really going to reduce his chances of infection?

REPLY: No this would probably help an individual engaging in every possible way in the wrong behavior, but then again why would someone do that, I mean wear a mask. Your description seems to apply to the kind of person who would not care enough to wear a mask in the first place. But let's keep in mind that mask wearing is not about individuals, take the same individual engaging the exact same behavior, first in a supermarket where he is the only person wearing a mask vs a supermarket where everybody wears a mask. Which situation do you think would better protect him and everyone?

You can stick as many masks as you want on the bus drivers and checkout workers and it still won't eliminate risk for them. All anyone has to do when thanking them for their service is to spit a droplet on a part of the workers body(clothes incl.) or any other inanimate object that the worker can touch and bring to mouth later after the mask has been taken off. The auld fomite risk does not dissapear.

But if the person thanking the worker had a mask on, well then, yes we might be getting closer to reducing risk.

I'm not denying their is some woeful mask usage going on in the GP. Let's not put down mask usage because of some poor behaviour, let's all mask up toether and educate.

Wibbs wrote: »

Given the way people seem to be getting complacent and relaxing personal restrictions IMHO one of the only ways to help stop the spread and get our country back up and running again are masks in publicly shared indoor spaces.

It's not one of the only ways, it's the only way!

+1 The only to help stop the spread and get our country back up and running again are masks in publicly shared indoor spaces.

McGiver

No: I don't care enough

Wibbs wrote:

Given the way people seem to be getting complacent and relaxing personal restrictions IMHO one of the only ways to help stop the spread and get our country back up and running again are masks in publicly shared indoor spaces.

Absolutely. As seanergy said - it's the only way. There's no way we can maintain strict social distancing once the restrictions are loosened. Masks will be absolutely necessary.

I suspect though that the government won't make the move, they are cowards and quite incompetent. I received a government poster by post few days ago telling me to WASH MY HANDS! That's absolutely shocking for me. That's a normal hygiene habit. If this is what they are able to organise in this stage of the epidemic then I've lost all hopes.

They won't mandate masks, this will cost another many billions of lost gov revenue, and economic disruption as further lockdowns will be needed. The lockdown hasn't fully worked, once loosened the cases will go up again, the only way to reduce that is mandate masks.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

McGiver wrote: »

I received a government poster by post few days ago telling me to WASH MY HANDS! That's absolutely shocking for me. That's a normal hygiene habit. If this is what they are able to organise in this stage of the epidemic then I've lost all hopes.

Welcome to the real world. For many years now people have not been washing their hands effectively nor often enough. It has actually reached the point where people have to reminded on how and when to wash their hands. It may seem basic to you but it has been lost on a huge number of people for quite some time. Look at the hand hygiene in public toilets and see how ridiculously unhygienic the general public have become.

Wibbs

Yes: other

Seanergy wrote: »

I'm not denying their is some woeful mask usage going on in the GP. Let's not put down mask usage because of some poor behaviour,

IMHO it's just another excuse in the long list of them to a) favour issues of supply over science b) focus on risk reduction to the healthy V risk reduction from the infected and c) saving face and moving responsibility elsewhere.

Poor behaviour is no excuse. Are people perfectly following social distancing, perfectly following the 2Km limit, perfectly following hand washing, perfectly following cough and sneeze protocol? Of course they're not, but these are seen as risk reducers even with imperfect use.

And yes issues of supply have been a factor. The frontline people need PPE, but that ship has mostly sailed. However, if fewer people get infected and become sick in the first place the same frontline workers won't need as much PPE.

It's not one of the only ways, it's the only way!

+1 The only to help stop the spread and get our country back up and running again are masks in publicly shared indoor spaces.

It's certainly right up there at the top, but I fear and as we've seen with our authorities dragging heels is a major problem. We still don't have effective contact tracing or testing, we still don't have any border control or health checks and we still don't have any options for quarantine. The large group of Travellers that came from the UK with their families in cars and caravans, landed in Dublin port and were able to make it all the way to Kildare to set up camp without hindrance illustrates this all too perfectly. Hell, as it stands if I get this pox and test positive there is pretty much feck all to stop me walking into my local Spar or Tesco, sniffling and hacking, with a positive test text on my phone. It's self imposed quarantine. A Guard if they spot me can't do much legally to stop me, beyond suggesting I eff off.

It's beyond farcical, yet we have so many thinking "ah shure haven't we done well at all at all". When Greece, the poor man of Europe, with twice our population, higher population density and a major existing problem with their refugee crisis has 133 dead and we have ten times that, I shake my bloody head.

Garlinge

No: other

Just to reply to earlier post about filter insert for a homemade mask... I picked up some cheap material sold as dusters in a Euroshop in early March. Non woven and selection of colours. I also have material used as interlining for homesewing projects and I think they would do also. Some people are suggesting even kitchen paper....

I am struggling with the wire bits. I have used up those wire bits that come with computer/electrical cables. I am presently using sandwichbag closures. I see someone mention aluminium strips (source?) and have read of people cutting down drink cans?

Zardoz

Yes: other

https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/face-masks-are-key-to-halting-coronavirus-and-helping-us-leave-lockdown-39157415.html

We should all wear a face mask - it's the best way to save lives and stop the spread of Covid-19 , writes Prof Luke O'Neill

This is the same guy who went on the Late Late show and incredulously told people that there was no need to be wearing masks and that hand washing was just as effective.:mad:

Seanergy

Yes: valved

Garlinge wrote: »

Just to reply to earlier post about filter insert for a homemade mask

I am struggling with the wire bits. I have used up those wire bits that come with computer/electrical cables. I am presently using sandwichbag closures. I see someone mention aluminium strips (source?) and have read of people cutting down drink cans?

I'm using green garden twist wire and it's working a dream. Friends using large paper clips and others took metal strip out of green filing cabinet folders....

Sandwhich bag closures sound a bit light as does drink can strips which also sound dangerously sharp.

iamwhoiam

Seanergy wrote: »

I'm using green garden twist wire and it's working a dream. Friends using large paper clips and others took metal strip out of green filing cabinet folders....

Sandwhich bag closures sound a bit light as does drink can strips which also sound dangerously sharp.

Just a hint . We used metal strips first but after a few wears they broke in two
We then used the blue narrow cable from a electric cable bundle . It works great

dfx-

No: other

Wibbs wrote: »

And let's change your disingenuous highlighting.

2.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2
This study is about surgical masks.
Our results indicate that surgical face masks could prevent transmission of human coronaviruses and influenza viruses from symptomatic individuals.

3.https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)01008-4/fulltext
This about masks in households.
The First Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of Mask Use in Households to Prevent Respiratory Virus Transmission
Conclusions: This is the first RCT on mask use to be conducted and provides data to inform pandemic planning. We found compliance to be low, but compliance is affected by perception of risk. In a pandemic, we would expect compliance to improve. In compliant users, masks were highly efficacious. A larger study is required to enumerate the difference in efficacy (if any) between surgical and non-fit tested P2 masks.

So here you were highlighting compliance, rather than the "highly efficacious" risk reduction. So they do work.

You ignored the rest because they didn't suit your position.

Just reading through these after the spectator article on a quiet Sunday (:)), they are by far from compelling, highlighting other sections..

2.

Among the samples collected without a face mask, we found that the majority of participants with influenza virus and coronavirus infection did not shed detectable virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols, whereas for rhinovirus we detected virus in aerosols in 19 of 34 (56%) participants (compared to 4 of 10 (40%) for influenza and 8 of 23 (35%) for coronavirus). For those who did shed virus in respiratory droplets and aerosols, viral load in both tended to be low (Fig. 1).

Given the high collection efficiency of the G-II (ref. 19) and given that each exhaled breath collection was conducted for 30 min, this might imply that prolonged close contact would be required for transmission to occur, even if transmission was primarily via aerosols, as has been described for rhinovirus colds20.

3.

Using intention to treat analysis, we found no significant difference in the relative risk of respiratory illness in the mask groups compared to control group. However, compliance with mask use was less than 50%. In an adjusted analysis of compliant subjects, masks as a group had protective efficacy in excess of 80% against clinical influenza-like illness.

You can't just ignore the non compliant users proviso or adjust the scenario for it or presume compliance. They also find surgical masks to be no more than 33% effective in the less than 50% who were compliant.

Wibbs wrote: »

Another look into the effectiveness of masks in public places.

Of course, we can’t know for sure to what degree these success stories are due to masks, but we do know that in every region that has adopted widespread mask-wearing, case and death rates have been reduced within a few weeks.[/I]

So even this isn't sure and is applying a "well it must be".

xhomelezz wrote: »

Plenty to read about masks here : https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4pt4oFDBhsC_jpblXpNtQ/mobilebasic#heading=h.9yzpxufkt5ow

I picked a random article here: Face Masks, Hand Hygiene and Influenza, albeit from 2012.

We also observed a substantial (43%) reduction in the incidence of influenza infection in the face mask and hand hygiene group compared to the control, but this estimate was not statistically significant. There were no substantial reductions in ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza in the face mask only group compared to the control. Our ILI findings are consistent with results from the first year of this two-year study [2] and a previous literature review on studies examining the efficacy of mask use in reducing transmission of respiratory viruses [12]. There are no other mask and hand hygiene intervention studies, to our knowledge, that have examined if wearing a mask prior to illness and jointly practicing hygiene prevents illness for the person practicing the intervention. The majority of earlier studies examined the impact of wearing a mask after a household member had been identified as an ILI or influenza case [13], [14], [15], [16]. Our study, therefore, is an important contribution to understanding the effectiveness of these interventions for mitigating influenza outbreaks and possibly pandemic scenarios in crowded and close living environments before outbreaks ensue.

Although few data are available to evaluate the efficacy of mask use in the community setting [17], four recent randomized mask intervention trials examined the impact of mask use on secondary transmission of ILI, upper respiratory infection and/or influenza in households [13], [14], [15], [16]. Cowling et al. [13] showed a reduction of 67% in influenza infection when masks were donned within 36 hours of the index case's symptom onset. Canini et al. [16] found no association between intervention households providing the primary case with masks compared to control households with no masks; the authors did, however, report a severely underpowered study due to early termination of the intervention. MacIntyre et al. [14] showed a borderline significant reduction in ILI among study participants using P2 masks but only 21% complied with mask use. Larson et al. [15] found no significant difference between targeted education, education with use of hand sanitizer, and education with masks and hand hygiene for overall rates of upper respiratory infection (URI); but, face masks were associated with a reduced secondary attack rate [15]. In contrast to these earlier studies, our design allowed us to follow disease-free participants at baseline who were asked to wear masks and/or conduct hygiene for the entire follow-up period, not just when they or their contacts were ill, thus limiting the potential for infection prior to mask adoption. Furthermore, our study design more accurately represents guidelines and plans that call for use of NPIs before susceptible individuals become ill [18].

dfx-

No: other

Boggles wrote: »

I guarantee you, in the not too distant future you will have another of Boris's advisors explaining to the British public that if they are caught on the tube without a mask they will be issued a fine.

Feel free to bookmark this post.

The reason the UK are experiencing 1000+ deaths a day and have collapsed large swathes of their emergency medical care is because their "scientists" diluted science with politics.

It never ever works.

Of course, scientific advice changes and the context changes. It will definitely change for the re-opening where social distancing is less prevalent with more people around.

MadYaker wrote: »

Not sure what your problem with masks is. The only reason the government aren't telling us all to wear one is because there isn't enough.

I've not a problem with full fitted masks or whether someone prefers to wear one or will do so when government advice changes. I am arguing that it is not a settled scientific subject. Studies so far are too small, too limited, too lab-based, not done using this virus, not realistic for the current circumstances, or compliance was too low with not statistically significant differences.

Garlinge

No: other

Yes I have that green cushioned wire but near out of it now. Also a bit concerned about heat of an iron melting the coating? I will look at paperclips... not sure if I have big ones though and yes careful to turn in ends so they do not escape fabric. I have a small pliers from jewellry making kit.

Seanergy

Yes: valved

Garlinge wrote: »

Yes I have that green cushioned wire but near out of it now. Also a bit concerned about heat of an iron melting the coating? I will look at paperclips... not sure if I have big ones though and yes careful to turn in ends so they do not escape fabric. I have a small pliers from jewellry making kit.

That's great stuff, how many masks are you making? Why are using an iron? Is it to sterlise or just to take the crease out of the fabric? pm me if you like.

Dank Janniels

Would denim be any good for masks? Iv afew old pairs of jeans that are ripped, was going to cut them up into rags but seems abit of a waste of material.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

Dank Janniels wrote: »

Would denim be any good for masks? Iv afew old pairs of jeans that are ripped, was going to cut them up into rags but seems abit of a waste of material.

Too loose a weave in my opinion.

Garlinge

No: other

I think denim is a decent fabric but perhaps too thick if putting in pleats/darts for shaping around face. Needle of sewing machine might complain. My favourite design has two layers of fabric then it is pleated each side. You could use a less thick fabric for inside but makes for more work.

Garlinge

No: other

I make 4 a day at the moment on a good day. Yes a lot of ironing during process makes for easier sewing. I did think to recommend a bit of steam to sterilise if an issue otherwise 10 mins immersion in 60 degree heat is sufficient to zap virus.

ShineOn7

Yes: surgical

Thoughts on these? How many uses with each?

A) https://www.inishpharmacy.com/p/kn95-respirator-mask-1-pack/arco-corona

https://www.inishpharmacy.com/p/non-woven-3-ply-face-masks-5-pack/corona-mask


Please state if you're referring to type A or B in your reply, thanks

Sleeper12

No: other

ShineOn7 wrote:

Thoughts on these? How many uses with each?

What are you hoping to achieve with your mask?

What type of use are you planning? Shopping, exercise, work etc?

ShineOn7

Yes: surgical

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What are you hoping to achieve with your mask?

What type of use are you planning? Shopping, exercise, work etc?

Shopping and exercise. With outdoor park exercise the priority

Sleeper12

No: other

ShineOn7 wrote:

Shopping and exercise. With outdoor park exercise the priority

You'll struggle to breath while exercising with the N95 mask. It fits tightly on your face & the only air for you to breath comes in the filter.

The other masks don't fit tightly on your face. There are gaps either side making it easier to breath during exercise.

For exercise the cheaper masks will work better. I'd only use a N95 if I had Covid19 and someone caring for me enters the room or if I entered a room with a Covid-19 patient that I was caring for.


Don't forget masks offer you no protection. They might protect others if you sneeze or cough on them. Most people wearing masks in the street secretly believe that they are protecting themselves whilst claiming to be wearing them to protect others. The vast majority of people are wearing & using masks incorrectly. You have only used a mask safely if its fitted correctly, it stays in place the whole time you are out & you don't touch it with or without gloves. You contaminate the mask each time you touch it or lower it & higher it again. If covid 19 was widespread in the community I honestly believe more people will infect themselves because of the masks than masks will save.

Wibbs

Yes: other

dfx- wrote: »

For those who did shed virus in respiratory droplets and aerosols, viral load in both tended to be low

Viral load in Covid19 patients has shown to be high. Here's a study into air ventilation in wards because of it.

Given the high collection efficiency of the G-II (ref. 19) and given that each exhaled breath collection was conducted for 30 min, this might imply that prolonged close contact would be required for transmission to occur, even if transmission was primarily via aerosols, as has been described for rhinovirus colds20.

Covid19 is not a rhinovirus. Transmission is by surface and aerosols. The viral load is high enough to be left on surfaces. Oh and on rhinoviruses... Here's a recent study into the efficacy of masks.

We detected coronavirus in respiratory droplets and aerosols in 3 of 10 (30%) and 4 of 10 (40%) of the samples collected without face masks, respectively, but did not detect any virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols collected from participants wearing face masks, this difference was significant in aerosols and showed a trend toward reduced detection in respiratory droplets

The conclusion was:
We identified seasonal human coronaviruses, influenza viruses and rhinoviruses in exhaled breath and coughs of children and adults with acute respiratory illness. Surgical face masks significantly reduced detection of influenza virus RNA in respiratory droplets and coronavirus RNA in aerosols, with a trend toward reduced detection of coronavirus RNA in respiratory droplets. Our results indicate that surgical face masks could prevent transmission of human coronaviruses and influenza viruses from symptomatic individuals.

You can't just ignore the non compliant users proviso or adjust the scenario for it or presume compliance. They also find surgical masks to be no more than 33% effective in the less than 50% who were compliant.

Even 33% reduction means lesser risk and again this was not measuring source control which is the more important part.

So even this isn't sure and is applying a "well it must be".

When every single nation that has got a handle on this mandates masks it certainly sounds like a better plan than not.

I picked a random article here: Face Masks, Hand Hygiene and Influenza, albeit from 2012.

You didn't highlight this very important part in relation to Covid19.

Cowling et al. [13] showed a reduction of 67% in influenza infection when masks were donned within 36 hours of the index case's symptom onset.

Nearly two thirds reduction. We know that Covid19 patients are infectious before they become symptomatic. If everyone is wearing a mask in public, the droplet load from the asymptomatic is lowered and the droplet load to the healthy is further reduced. This is what I was saying when I noted the debate on this is too far on the self protection side, not the more important infection side, again source control. The joke is that's why surgeons wear masks. Not to protect themselves, but to reduce the risk of infecting patients in theatre. That's their very purpose.

dfx- wrote: »

I've not a problem with full fitted masks or whether someone prefers to wear one or will do so when government advice changes. I am arguing that it is not a settled scientific subject. Studies so far are too small, too limited, too lab-based, not done using this virus, not realistic for the current circumstances, or compliance was too low with not statistically significant differences.

Compliance is simple enough. If you can't enter a shop or other indoor space without a mask, people will quite simply have to wear one. Even if they have them on incorrectly, it will still reduce the droplets in the environment, both in aerosol form and on surfaces.

ShineOn7

Yes: surgical

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Don't forget masks offer you no protection

I really have a pain in my árse with "they do offer protection"/"they don't offer protection" when it comes to masks

Not having a go at you Sleeper. Clarification is needed from every single government on it as to where we stand with masks and Covid

Personally; I'll be wearing one in certain circumstances rather than not

Wibbs

Yes: other

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'd only use a N95 if I had Covid19 and someone caring for me enters the room or if I entered a room with a Covid-19 patient that I was caring for.

I hate to break it too you it would offer protection in the latter case but bugger all in the former as most N95 masks exhale unfiltered air and pretty much all respirators do.

Don't forget masks offer you no protection.

So they work in clinical settings, but again magically don't offer protection outside them? Yet your previous sentence states you'd wear one if you had the does or were in a room with someone with it. Yet they offer no protection. That's called a contrary and frankly illogical position. Not a shock given the HSE have been peddling the same daftness.

They might protect others if you sneeze or cough on them.

They do. See 67% reduction in risk in the above post's linked study.

Most people wearing masks in the street secretly believe that they are protecting themselves whilst claiming to be wearing them to protect others.

I have a PP3 level respirator. Highest filtration available beyond going full hazmat with gas mask/positive air and a far tighter fit than the cheaper cup style N95 masks. I used to wear it, but the fact is I'm expelling unfiltered air so am a risk to others and why I subsequently went the surgical mask route.

The vast majority of people are wearing & using masks incorrectly. You have only used a mask safely if its fitted correctly, it stays in place the whole time you are out & you don't touch it with or without gloves. You contaminate the mask each time you touch it or lower it & higher it again. If covid 19 was widespread in the community I honestly believe more people will infect themselves because of the masks than masks will save.

Well according to your logic they "offer you no protection", so badly fitted or not...

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Here's something I haven't thought about before. If/when I get sick, I plan on isolating in my room, but when I leave my room (to use the bathroom), I'm going to have to put on a mask to somewhat prevent droplets landing everywhere (I will also clean/bleach bathroom after I use it)... Can I reuse the same mask if I'm infected anyways?

Sleeper12

No: other

ShineOn7 wrote:

Not having a go at you Sleeper. Clarification is needed from every single government on it as to where we stand with masks and Covid

I don't believe any government claims that they offer protection to the person wearing the mask while out on the street.

ShineOn7 wrote:

Personally; I'll be wearing one in certain circumstances rather than not

I'm not having a pop at anyone wanting to wear one. It doesn't effect me in any way if you wear one or not. I do urge people to educate themselves on how to put on & remove gloves. Even more important is to educate yourself on how to put on & remove a mask. If you touch your mask while wearing it then you will need to change masks immediately. Obviously you will need to wash your hands before putting on a clean mask. I see people use the same mask every day! I see elderly ladies with scarfs over their mouth and using their hand to hold it in place. They touch surfaces, groceries, cash, cards etc and then put their contaminated hand (gloves or no gloves) over the scarf covering their mouth & nose. Some of these people will kill themselves if Covid-19 becomes widespread in the community.

I think the government should say right lots of people want to wear masks despite the WHO & HSE advice, therefore we should educate them on how to use them correctly. We can argue about how useful they are or aren't at a later stage but for now we train people to use them safely. Masks are capable of killing someone if not used correctly

Sleeper12

No: other

Wibbs wrote:

Well according to your logic they "offer you no protection", so badly fitted or not...

Not my logic. I follow the WHO & HSE advice. In work we have implemented all the HSE guidelines.

I was assuming that someone who believes that they provide them protection would want to fit it correctly to offer them the best protection. WHO, HSE or myself don't need to believe in masks that someone else wears. The wearer is the only one who needs to believe.

Are you suggesting that because I point out that the WHO & HSE say they offer no protection that people should wear them incorrectly? Why bother wear them at all if not correctly?

Do you not see people every day using masks in a dangerous way? Do you not believe that the government should educate these people on the safe way to wear a mask. The jury might be out on their effectiveness but it's been a known fact for more than my lifetime that using a mask incorrectly can be lethal. All medical personnel were trained to use PPE correctly before they were ever allowed use the in the field.