Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Visors - conflicting messages.

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭ El_Duderino 09



    They're not conflicting really. Seems pretty clear from both messages that the shield isn't as effective as a mask. It might be a good alternative (to using nothing) if for teachers, but it doesn't say they're as good as masks.

    Seems obvious enough that the air isn't being filtered at all through the shield. It just can't travel out in a straight line from the person's face when they breath out and isn't being filtered at all when they breath in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭ Tchaikovsky


    Don't believe the Daily Mail.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,862 ✭✭✭ Hayden Melodic Nurse


    Don't believe the Daily Mail.

    +1

    Visors are as useful as a chocolate teapot


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,392 ✭✭✭ CQD


    I just saw a lady in the shop there with a visor going from her nose down..not over her eyes like..looked like something out of a bad 80s sci-fi B movie..


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭ El_Duderino 09


    Don't believe the Daily Mail.

    On factual stuff the Dailly Mail is grand. It concise and usually a good overview. I wouldn't read any of its editorials. In this instance the DM is relaying info from the WHO and I'd say it's grand.

    The "don't believe the mail" line is actually very lazy.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 610 ✭✭✭ SortingYouOut


    I don't see how anyone looking at them cannot see how they would ineffective with a mask also.

    Do they think aerosols won't make their way sideways or down and under. It's kind of funny.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭ raind


    Masks / visor etc are to reduce spread, not really to protect the individual. If someone coughs with a visor on most of the droplets will land on the visor. yes, more will escape than with a mask, but overall the amount of potential virus in the air will be reduced significantly.

    But the consensus here, as with most measures seems to be "its not perfect, therefore its useless"


  • Registered Users Posts: 610 ✭✭✭ SortingYouOut


    raind wrote: »
    Masks / visor etc are to reduce spread, not really to protect the individual. If someone coughs with a visor on most of the droplets will land on the visor. yes, more will escape than with a mask, but overall the amount of potential virus in the air will be reduced significantly.

    But the consensus here, as with most measures seems to be "its not perfect, therefore its useless"

    Visors are pretty much useless. Yes, they'll stop droplets but plenty more will escape onto surfaces around the person and into the air. Masks allow some escape but nowhere near as much as visors. The WHO have advised against wearing them alone for good reason.

    They're used by medical staff for extra facial protection with their ffp3 but any public members wearing them without a mask are really just making themselves look stupid for no real return.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,467 ✭✭✭✭ drunkmonkey


    CQD wrote: »
    I just saw a lady in the shop there with a visor going from her nose down..not over her eyes like..looked like something out of a bad 80s sci-fi B movie..

    Yea met one of those an hour ago, visor from the nose down, new trend in the 70+ lady's fashion scene.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭ raind


    Visors are pretty much useless. Yes, they'll stop droplets but plenty more will escape onto surfaces around the person and into the air. Masks allow some escape but nowhere near as much as visors. The WHO have advised against wearing them alone for good reason.

    They're used by medical staff for extra facial protection with their ffp3 but any public members wearing them without a mask are really just making themselves look stupid for no real return.

    They are useless at preventing complete suppression. So are masks, but less so. They still have an effect though. Every droplet stopped is a potential infection avoided.

    Both masks and visors are significantly less effective than hand hygiene, social distancing, respiratory etiquette and surface cleaning however, and are not worth much without some or all of the other measure


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,467 ✭✭✭✭ drunkmonkey


    raind wrote: »
    They are useless at preventing complete suppression. So are masks, but less so. ***They still have an effect though. Every droplet stopped is a potential infection avoided.

    Both masks and visors are significantly less effective than hand hygiene, social distancing, respiratory etiquette and surface cleaning however, and are not worth much without some or all of the other measure

    ***If using them clinically, I'm seeing very little visor washing going on.
    Your points only apply in a labatory not out in the general population, there is no evidence to support your theroy.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,867 Mod ✭✭✭✭ CatFromHue


    They're not conflicting messages at all, as they're two very different situations.

    In a speech class the students will be working on how to lip read so need to see the lips. The visor is better than nothing and helps the class go ahead.

    Hotels don't run speech classes so they shouldn't be using them.

    Special needs education is not the same as working in a hotel.


  • Registered Users Posts: 806 ✭✭✭ Akabusi


    Like most things to do with this virus, it is common sense that visors will not be as good as masks, how could they be when they don't provide a seal. In the simplest terms possible a visor is better than wearing nothing at all, a mask is better than a visor.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,467 ✭✭✭✭ drunkmonkey


    How is a visor better than nothing, if it's on the inside of the visor and your inhaling it.
    Visors, Masks, Gloves all carry risks that in the wide don't justify mandatory policies for the general public.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭ El_Duderino 09


    Akabusi wrote: »
    Like most things to do with this virus, it is common sense that visors will not be as good as masks, how could they be when they don't provide a seal. In the simplest terms possible a visor is better than wearing nothing at all, a mask is better than a visor.
    I mean, that's all anyone needs to know. And it's what the first article in the OP implied when it said a visor might be an alternative if the students need to see the teacher's mouth as they speak.

    It's a very simple message in all honesty.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭ El_Duderino 09


    How is a visor better than nothing, if it's on the inside of the visor and your inhaling it.
    Visors, Masks, Gloves all carry risks that in the wide don't justify mandatory policies for the general public.

    Just for all the obvious reasons. The visor stops the person from spitting droplets of saliva as they'll hit the screen, bit it doesn't filter aerosols. Ergo it's better than nothing but not as good as a mask which does both, to an extent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,505 ✭✭✭ DeepBlue


    https://www.dailymail <- I stopped reading at this point.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,467 ✭✭✭✭ drunkmonkey


    Just for all the obvious reasons. The visor stops the person from spitting droplets of saliva as they'll hit the screen, bit it doesn't filter aerosols. Ergo it's better than nothing but not as good as a mask which does both, to an extent.

    I'm not talking about their own droplets, it's other people's sticking to the front then you touch it or landing on the inside.

    Is that not obvious, nobody talks about the dangers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭ El_Duderino 09


    I'm not talking about their own droplets, it's other people's sticking to the front then you touch it or landing on the inside.

    Is that not obvious, nobody talks about the dangers.

    Right. But those droplets were probably going to hit the person's face if they wire nothing. But instead, they hit the visor. So the visor is better than nothing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,093 i_surge


    I don't see how anyone looking at them cannot see how they would ineffective with a mask also.

    Do they think aerosols won't make their way sideways or down and under. It's kind of funny.

    I never realised how fundamentally stupid people can be until this covid craic. A real eye opener and depressing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,654 ✭✭✭ Quantum Erasure


    How is a visor better than nothing, if it's on the inside of the visor and your inhaling it.
    agree
    Visors, Masks, Gloves all carry risks that in the wide don't justify mandatory policies for the general public.

    No.
    wash your hands, wear a mask, sanitise


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,504 CMod ✭✭✭✭ spurious


    What happened the warning that it could enter the body through the eyes?
    Mask no use for that. Visor gets in the way of touching your eyes. Swings and roundabouts. Use both to be sure.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,654 ✭✭✭ Quantum Erasure


    spurious wrote: »
    What happened the warning that it could enter the body through the eyes?
    Mask no use for that. Visor gets in the way of touching your eyes. Swings and roundabouts. Use both to be sure.

    Seatbelts work, airbags offer additional safety, but I wouldn't be relying on an airbag without using a seatbelt first...


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭ political analyst


    DeepBlue wrote: »
    https://www.dailymail <- I stopped reading at this point.

    Whatever you think of the Mail, the point is what the WHO and Unicef said about visors.


Advertisement