nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Masks

fr336

How many people on Boards have a mask and if so are you wearing them for essential trips? And this late in the day where can you get one that is going to be half decent and not from a suspect seller who could have done anything to it?

Find more posts tagged with

shop

mask

covering

covid

facemask

Comments

[Deleted User]

Sam Hain wrote: »

Exactly. If by chance you are asymptomatic, this gives you have a false sense of security when around others. There are far better options out there that protect both the wearer and the general public. Why not don one of those instead.

They are not being worn to protect the general public though in this case. They are the protect the members of the unit who are in close contact with each other for a long time period and in close confines. They are all wearing the masks so they should all be protected from each other. They could wear a nonvalved mask.. but that's going to make it even more uncomfortable to wear long term (plus I'd guess it will contribute to visor fogging if the air doesn't have a preferential exhaust) which puts the unit members are more risk

Bob24

Sam Hain wrote: »

Great contribution, maybe you could be enlighten me, rather than being condescending. I look forward to hearing your expert opinions on the subject.

I see two reasons for your post asking “Why would you wear a mask with an exhaust valve?”:
1) Either you don’t know what a valve does; which would be easy to look up from this thread or elsewhere online.
2) Or you know what the valve is and the only propose for the question was to subsequently lecture the OP about the fact that with the valve his masks are not preventing him from contaminating others; which is already common knowledge on the thread. If the OP could only find valved masks or has made that choice for whatever reasons (maybe because they need to wear them for hours and it is unpractical without a valve), there is no need to question them.

So just my opinion but I personally don’t think your post was exactly a great contribution to the thread either.

At the end of the day this is a difficult situation an most people wear whichever mask they can find (or had at home for other uses). And they can’t be blamed for trying to protect themselves and their families with valved mask if that is the only thing they have (someone who has a valved mais already planned for this better than average, and it isn’t exactly like our government is helping and making surgical masks or non-valved respirators widely available to the public).

Sam Hain

riffmongous wrote: »

They are not being worn to protect the general public though in this case. They are the protect the members of the unit who are in close contact with each other for a long time period and in close confines. They are all wearing the masks so they should all be protected from each other. They could wear a nonvalved mask.. but that's going to make it even more uncomfortable to wear long term (plus I'd guess it will contribute to visor fogging if the air doesn't have a preferential exhaust) which puts the unit members are more risk

Fair enough, in the right environment they are a great addition to protection but the amount of these type of masks I see in the supermarkes is mind boggling.

[Deleted User]

Sam Hain wrote: »

Fair enough, in the right environment they are a great addition to protection but the amount of these type of masks I see in the supermarkes is mind boggling.

Agreed, in a supermarket or public nonvalved would be better for everyone, or if possible something catching the vented air. Just incase you weren't aware the poster who owns those masks is a firefighter and that's why they posted the picture of them.

Sam Hain

Bob24 wrote: »

I see two reasons for you post asking “Why would you wear a mask with an exhaust valve?”:
1) Either you don’t know what a valve does; which would be easy to look up from this thread or elsewhere online.
2) Or you know what the valve is and the only propose for the question was to subsequently lecture the OP about the fact that with the valve his masks are not preventing him from contaminating others; which is already common knowledge on the thread. If the OP could only find valve masks or has made that choice for whatever reasons (maybe because they need to wear them for hours and it is unpractical without a valve), there is no need to question them.

So IMO your post wasn’t exactly a great contribution to the thread either.

Theres alot of individuals in this thread who seem to have the monopoly on what opinions are allowed and have taken the moral high ground. And you are one of the worse of these. I asked the question in order to gain some insight into the reasoning. I do not spend my whole time reading every post in this thread, as you obviously do, possibly to count the circle jerking thanks that you are swapping with others.

UrbanFret

Sam Hain wrote: »

Exactly. If by chance you are asymptomatic, this gives you a false sense of security when around others. There are far better options out there that protect both the wearer and the general public. Why not don one of those instead.

Can only use what we have been issued by HQ. As riffmongus rightly states when we all have them on then we should all be protected. The advice we are getting is fluid so it's constantly changing as we learn more about how this virus spreads.

Sam Hain

riffmongous wrote: »

Agreed, in a supermarket or public nonvalved would be better for everyone, or if possible something catching the vented air. Just incase you weren't aware the poster who owns those masks is a firefighter and that's why they posted the picture of them.

I was unaware of this, thats why I asked the question.

Bob24

Sam Hain wrote: »

Theres alot of individuals in this thread who seem to have the monopoly on what opinions are allowed and have taken the moral high ground. And you are one of the worse of these. I asked the question in order to gain some insight into the reasoning. I do not spend my whole time reading every post in this thread, as you obviously do, possibly to count the circle jerking thanks that you are swapping with others.

Just for the record, the reason I clearly explained how I viewed your original post is that i found the below rather condescending while at the same time calling another poster condescending:

Sam Hain wrote: »

Great contribution, maybe you could be enlighten me, rather than being condescending. I look forward to hearing your expert opinions on the subject.

I wouldn’t have answered if that language hadn’t been used in the first place.

And you will notice my comments were on the specific content of your post rather than taking it personal with an unsubstantiated attack such as your answer “Theres alot of individuals in this thread who seem to have the monopoly on what opinions are allowed and have taken the moral high ground. And you are one of the worse of these.”.

Now I don’t think any of us wants to pick-up a fight here so apologies if you genuinely didn’t understand why someone might wear such mask and let’s move on :-)

To move back on topic ... and on this I would like to insist that while of course we agree valves aren’t great from the perspective of protecting the overall community, most people will wear whichever mask they can find. None of us can go to the local shop or online, specify which type of mask we want, and have it tomorrow.

So to answer your original question, IMO more often than not the answer is: it is the only mask they could buy or which they already had at home. And since valved masks aren’t useless and are still providing protection for the wearer, if someone has them but nothing else, it still makes sense to wear them.

[Deleted User]

Sam Hain wrote: »

I was unaware of this, thats why I asked the question.

Yeah I guessed so, cause your logic is perfectly reasonable

saneman

Bob24 wrote: »

...

So to answer your original question, IMO more often than not the answer is: it is the only mask they could buy or which they already had at home.

Exactly this. There can't be an expectation that everyone in the general public will be aware of the different types of masks that are out there.

Take the N95 masks alone, a US specification that wouldn't usually even be available through normal channels in Europe. It's one of 9 different face filtering masks with that group alone. Then you have the EU versions, (P1, P2, P3, valved/unvalved). Then half masks, some with clip-on filters, others are limited use with integrated filters. Surgical masks have 3 categories depending on the use case.

The above is the reason the steps taken by Spanish authorities are positive, they've gone with a mask with a specification that offers protection, made the specification available to local manufacturers/suppliers, made available details on their correct use to be included with the mask, and declared their use mandatory for those returning to work.

From the UNE specification document: " it (the specification) will be shared with the standardization bodies at European and international level, just in case usefulness in whole or in part to address the health crisis in which the world population is immersed."

I hope our government uses this or similar as part of their strategy. Until that point i'll be using/reusing (with care) the single P2 mask I have, as it happens it's unvalved but that's also the only reason I still have it, I used any valved masks I had for normal dust protection in the "before times".

McGiver

saneman wrote: »

Exactly this. There can't be an expectation that everyone in the general public will be aware of the different types of masks that are out there.

Take the N95 masks alone, a US specification that wouldn't usually even be available through normal channels in Europe. It's one of 9 different face filtering masks with that group alone. Then you have the EU versions, (P1, P2, P3, valved/unvalved). Then half masks, some with clip-on filters, others are limited use with integrated filters. Surgical masks have 3 categories depending on the use case.

The above is the reason the steps taken by Spanish authorities are positive, they've gone with a mask with a specification that offers protection, made the specification available to local manufacturers/suppliers, made available details on their correct use to be included with the mask, and declared their use mandatory for those returning to work.

From the UNE specification document: " it (the specification) will be shared with the standardization bodies at European and international level, just in case usefulness in whole or in part to address the health crisis in which the world population is immersed."

I hope our government uses this or similar as part of their strategy.

Irish government has no strategy and isn't able to govern. Extremely unlikely Irish government would be able to organise distribution of masks to workers once the lockdown is loosened. It's simply not going to happen.

Mandate simple face masks. Post basic dos and don'ts how to wear them. Post basic sewing DIY instructions. It's very simple. US CDC done that why the Irish government can't do this is mind boggling.

Bob24

saneman wrote: »

I hope our government uses this or similar as part of their strategy.

Yes agree and the government was in my mind as one of the parties at fault for not informing the public properly.

I think they have backed themselves in a corner though ...

Since they are saying masks are of no benefit if you don’t have symptoms, they can’t at the same time be explaining which types of masks do what (they would quickly be contradicting their own stance if they start explaining that some masks can offer protection to a non-contaminated wearer, or that others can be useful to prevent asymptomatic transmission, and than non-valved FFP2 respirators can actually do both at the same time).

So before our government takes those steps you suggest they need to change the official policy on masks usage.

saneman

Bob24 wrote: »

Yes agree and the government was in my mind as one of the parties at fault for not informing the public properly.

I think they have backed themselves in a corner though ...

Since they are saying masks are of no benefit if you don’t have symptoms, they can’t at the same time be explaining which types of masks do what (they would quickly be contradicting their own stance if they start explaining that some masks can offer protection to a non-contaminated wearer, or that others can be useful to prevent asymptomatic transmission, and than non-valved FFP2 respirators can actually do both at the same time).

So before our government takes those steps you suggest they need to change the official policy on masks usage.

Yes, I do, under the "this is a constantly evolving situation.." type declaration (which it is). And it's not at all infeasible that something like this will happen again, at least we'd have a baseline strategy for the future.

And it's funny (not ha ha), while in the rabbit hole i found myself in during the last few days regarding masks, re-use, etc. (actually quite nice down here, I may stay) I came across this report:

Reusability of Facemasks During an Influenza Pandemic (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11637/reusability-of-facemasks-during-an-influenza-pandemic-facing-the-flu)

First it comes from 2006, and feck all seems to have been done regarding its recommendations, but it's the last lines that are particularly salient:

"Any public health effort aimed at extending the usefulness of existing devices must be delivered with clarity and truthfulness. The public is likely to forgive lack of knowledge but will not be willing to trust public health officials in the next instance if they have in any way been misinformed or misled."

UrbanFret

I'll just post this here ,it may be of help in giving an insight in to the purpose of wearing a mask.

McGiver

Bob24 wrote: »

Yes agree and the government was in my mind as one of the parties at fault for not informing the public properly.

I think they have backed themselves in a corner though ...

Since they are saying masks are of no benefit if you don’t have symptoms, they can’t at the same time be explaining which types of masks do what (they would quickly be contradicting their own stance if they start explaining that some masks can offer protection to a non-contaminated wearer, or that others can be useful to prevent asymptomatic transmission, and than non-valved FFP2 respirators can actually do both at the same time).

So before our government takes those steps you suggest they need to change the official policy on masks usage.

They simply won't. Not going to happen. And it will costs very many lives, unfortunately. Keeping face is more important to them than people's lives.

Also, such a long lockdown will be economically very destructive.

Czech Republic have had only 3 weeks of lockdown, actually less strict than Ireland, the only exception being mandatory masks. They've peaked now and are loosening restrictions, masks mandatory only in buildings an crowded spaces, not needed when you go for a walk. But still masks are part of the solution.

Ireland will have had minimum of 6 weeks of lockdown. This will cost a lot of money and if masks are not mandated indoors it won't be that effective. Still growing 10% daily and not peaking.

Wibbs

McGiver wrote: »

Czech Republic have had only 3 weeks of lockdown, actually less strict than Ireland, the only exception being mandatory masks.

To be fair, the Czechs were much more restrictive earlier on, after a false start. They closed their borders for a start. The initial lockdown was stricter and more enforced(though it seems it didn't need to be nearly as much as here) and came into force more all at once than ours. The masks came later from a groundswell of calls from their own people, backed by experts among them. They were more proactive from both top and bottom to try and minimise this virus' impact. All this seems to have served them much better than our own governments lagging behind, reactive, only jump when the WHO and ECDC told them to. Never mind the laissez faire attitude to social distancing among our own population. I sadly suspect if masks became mandatory in Ireland soon(and pigs might fly), without enforcement quite the number here would flout the rules.

the.red.baron

It's Slovakia we really need to check out, making the Czechs look sloppy yet again

greasepalm

Now would you wear this?

https://www.facebook.com/catgrega/videos/10109381799121384/

Wibbs

greasepalm wrote: »

Now would you wear this?

https://www.facebook.com/catgrega/videos/10109381799121384/

:D:D:D

Me. Earlier. Going to the shops.

180108-john-young-astronaut-mn-0958_fd7d56ec6f17f7c745da9fd3079e0832.1200;630;7;70;5.jpg

My car is an EV too. Very environmentally aware I am.

august12

Masks to become the ‘norm’ as Covid-19 to 'stalk the human race' for some time
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/masks-to-become-the-norm-as-covid-19-to-stalk-the-human-race-for-some-time-993809.html?utm_source=androidapp&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=sharebutton

2u2me

Wibbs wrote: »

My car is an EV too. Very environmentally aware I am.

That's the least eco friendly EV in(out) of this world!

masculinist

Bob24 wrote: »

Yes agree and the government was in my mind as one of the parties at fault for not informing the public properly.

I think they have backed themselves in a corner though ...

Since they are saying masks are of no benefit if you don’t have symptoms, they can’t at the same time be explaining which types of masks do what (they would quickly be contradicting their own stance if they start explaining that some masks can offer protection to a non-contaminated wearer, or that others can be useful to prevent asymptomatic transmission, and than non-valved FFP2 respirators can actually do both at the same time).

So before our government takes those steps you suggest they need to change the official policy on masks usage.

Well adverts and Facebook too won't let me even give away my ffp2 and ffp3 masks for free. Or let me enter the free market and secure my families safety. Its not like I wouldn't need money to extend my life anyway if I developed cancer tomorrow.
The HSE has done nothing except acknowledge my contact a few weeks ago.

Thingymebob

masculinist wrote: »

Well adverts and Facebook too won't let me even give away my ffp2 and ffp3 masks for free. Or let me enter the free market and secure my families safety. Its not like I wouldn't need money to extend my life anyway if I developed cancer tomorrow.
The HSE has done nothing except acknowledge my contact a few weeks ago.

I’m sure there’s people on Boards who would be happy to PM you their address for free masks

greasepalm

Wibbs wrote: »

:D:D:D

Me. Earlier. Going to the shops.

My car is an EV too. Very environmentally aware I am.

How did you pay for your items,put your hand on your wallet?

greasepalm

Originally Posted by masculinist View Post
Well adverts and Facebook too won't let me even give away my ffp2 and ffp3 masks for free. Or let me enter the free market and secure my families safety. Its not like I wouldn't need money to extend my life anyway if I developed cancer tomorrow.
The HSE has done nothing except acknowledge my contact a few weeks ago.

I am sure plenty of places would accept masks local nursing home,carers,and the list could go on.

fr336

I keep buying masks without properly researching them! I keep thinking "I need them asap, because what if it doesn't turn up till next week and I get the virus this week?" Sigh...

Anyway just bought two of these which I think are okay https://www.ukmeds.co.uk/hygiene-face-mask-ffp2-n95

Any thoughts?

fr336

Wibbs wrote: »

:D:D:D

Me. Earlier. Going to the shops.

My car is an EV too. Very environmentally aware I am.

I thought that was you Wibbs, but didn't want to call you over in the current climate.

Thingymebob

fr336 wrote: »

I keep buying masks without properly researching them! I keep thinking "I need them asap, because what if it doesn't turn up till next week and I get the virus this week?" Sigh...

Anyway just bought two of these which I think are okay https://www.ukmeds.co.uk/hygiene-face-mask-ffp2-n95

Any thoughts?

For £11.95 for a single use mask I think they saw you coming.

Bob24

fr336 wrote: »

I keep buying masks without properly researching them! I keep thinking "I need them asap, because what if it doesn't turn up till next week and I get the virus this week?" Sigh...

Anyway just bought two of these which I think are okay https://www.ukmeds.co.uk/hygiene-face-mask-ffp2-n95

Any thoughts?

If they are genuine and meet the certifications mentioned on the website they are good masks yes.

However the website is just a bit unclear with which brand it is and which certification they are matching. They mention FFP2/N95 and the product pictures also mention KN95, which are all equivalent (for Europe, the US, and China). But I haven’t seen before a mask which is marked as meeting all 3 standards at the same time, usually it should be just the one for the market they were intended for. This plus the fact that they are not listing a clear brand / model number you could research makes me a little uneasy about what they are actually selling, so I guess it is down to wether the website itself can be considered reliable (which I don’t know).

Plus I guess you’re aware and ok with that as you really want masks, but as the other poster was mentioning their price for one mask is what you would have paid for a box of 10 generic FFP2 masks a few months ago (I just looked it up and I actually paid 14 GBP for a box of 20 branded ones from a reliable UK website back in early February).

Spring Celebrator

the.red.baron wrote: »

It's Slovakia we really need to check out, making the Czechs look sloppy yet again

Yep. People started wearing masks around middle of March, 2 covid related deaths so far.