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

Wibbs

paddy19 wrote: »

I can't find any either.

Viruses have been around for a long time, if the case for wearing masks outdoors was strong you would think there would be 5 studies.

Are we going to make every man, women and child wear a mask outdoors forever based on "it looks like the masks are helping".

This is dangerous Anti-Vaxxers territory, decisions based on opinions not science.

Science is far from perfect and gets things wrong but basing decisions on opinions is the road to chaos.

Now you just have to be on a wind up. It's not within an asses roar of anti vaxxer territory. Vaccines work. Your position is more anti science. Taking vaccines; an analogy to your position is that vaccines may work if administered in a hospital, but magically lose this ability if administered outside of one.

Again since you appear to have missed/ignored this because it didn't suit your position. All experts agree that masks provide protection and reduce risk in clinical settings and in home settings when someone is sick and/or someone is looking after someone who is sick. The WHO, the ECDC, the CDC, the HSE, every single medical authority on the planet agrees with this position. So masks provide protection from and to the infected and non infected. That's their very purpose in infectious medicine. This is fact, not opinion.

Do you deny this? Yes, or no?

And yet again, for what must be the third fourth fifth sixth time now, I ask you how are masks protective in clinical settings and for people with an infection and those living with them, but the same masks magically lose this protective ability in a shop, or work space? Can you answer that, or do you believe they're not protective in clinical settings(though that would require insanity to believe that), or will you continue to ignore the evidence you claim you have to see to believe?

And you have been given studies, but when you partially replied you mis-highlighted selected excerpts from same, though even then left in the positive evidence. Yep this is either a wind up, or bull headed resistance to the bloody obvious, for god knows what reason.

S.M.B.

paddy19 wrote: »

I can't find any either.

Viruses have been around for a long time, if the case for wearing masks outdoors was strong you would think there would be 5 studies.

Are we going to make every man, women and child wear a mask outdoors forever based on "it looks like the masks are helping".

This is dangerous Anti-Vaxxers territory, decisions based on opinions not science.

Science is far from perfect and gets things wrong but basing decisions on opinions is the road to chaos.

It's nowhere near 'dangerous Anti-Vaxxers territory'. Refusing to do something that's scientifically proven to help the masses is not the same as being more than willing to do something that may help the masses but is yet to be scientifically proven for this exact scenario.

Hopefully we'll get more comprehensive studies in the foreseeable future.

Duke of Url

SurperValu has loads of Surgical Masks for 2.50 each.

Wibbs

paddy19 wrote: »

Are you proposing that every man, woman and child wears a surgical mask both indoors and outdoors forever!

Precisely nobody is suggesting that. So again, wind up, or bull headed resistance.

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.

Wibbs

Duke of Url wrote: »

SurperValu has loads of Surgical Masks for 2.50 each.

That's pricey though. Some of the Spar branches have them 10 for 12 quid. Might be worth a look.

Duke of Url

Wibbs wrote: »

That's pricey though. Some of the Spar branches have them 10 for 12 quid. Might be worth a look.

I think they are useful if you find yourself in a situation that you may feel safer with one.

Seanergy

paddy19 wrote: »

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/face-masks-should-there-be-a-cover-up-

One of the better articles on masks I have read.

Dr John Lee author of said ‘better article’ has jumped on a flawed study about cloth face masks and with all his pride rode it off the cliff.

The particle counting method stated in that study is novel for the determination of filtering efficiency of a mask.

The study also compares 2 ply cloth face masks against 3 ply surgical masks.

The 2ply cloth face masks were selected on the basis of design and fabric material from a street market in Kathmandu, yet the study never mentions the fabric composition, it appears to have been tailored to poke holes in cloth face masks from the outset.

Dr Lee dishes not only cloth face masks but also surgical face masks as still not being good enough to filter out viruses.

The point of his article is that science advisors like him have had their pride and purpose bruised by government’s who are leap frogging lack of scientific evidence on cloth face masks.

Is that the only study on cloth face masks using ambient air that you have come across?

Screen-Shot-2020-04-21-at-11.24.10.png

Boulevardier

If we are to use face masks more often, particularly on a single use basis, the masks need to be more affordable.

I am running into unaffordable prices like 2.50 each (A Rathmines newsagent), 15 Euro for 5, (i.e. 3 Euro) each (A Terenure pharmacy) and at best 2 for 5 Euro (a Rathgar pharmacy).

This is too much. Anyone know of better value?

pm1977x

I paid €30 for 10 in my local pharmacy a couple of weeks back, they were the only place that had them locally and I needed them for my wife, wasn't impressed with the price though! :eek:

Ben Done

Boulevardier wrote: »

If we are to use face masks more often, particularly on a single use basis, the masks need to be more affordable.

I am running into unaffordable prices like 2.50 each (A Rathmines newsagent), 15 Euro for 5, (i.e. 3 Euro) each (A Terenure pharmacy) and at best 2 for 5 Euro (a Rathgar pharmacy).

This is too much. Anyone know of better value?

I've 100 on the way (slow boat from China) for £22.50, bought on Amazon.

Also bought 10, supposedly UK stock, for £5.72, but both had to be sent to Parcel Motel / Wizard..

Boggles

Boulevardier wrote: »

If we are to use face masks more often, particularly on a single use basis

You don't use them on a single use basis, that is for front line staff who are getting blasted with the virus every day.

Rotate your masks.

cnocbui

The virus behind the world's COVID-19 pandemic can stay infectious in the air for more than 12 hours, early research out of four major US laboratories suggests, as more scientists warn it may have been underestimated by authorities such as the World Health Organisation.

It is still unclear how much of the SARS-CoV-2 virus you would need to inhale to get sick. But researchers from America's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and elsewhere found it was "remarkably resilient" in the air when aerosolised into smaller particles compared with the two other deadly coronaviruses to emerge in humans, SARS and MERS. After 16 hours, particles of the new virus could still infect cells in a dish and looked intact under the microscope.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/warning-light-coronavirus-can-last-longer-in-air-than-first-thought-20200420-p54li8.html

Mask up.

Kenjataimu

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1253010286099009538?s=20

Away With The Fairies

Kenjataimu wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1253010286099009538?s=20

Finally

Wibbs

They have taken their time, but again I'd not hold my breath. The HSE and govt have been reactive and lagging throughout. The problem is I think it may be too late unless they come out strongly in favour.

In my neck of the woods anyway, over the last two days both car and foot traffic is way up on last week. I mentioned this to a chap in the local garage while I getting petrol and he confirmed that their footfall has increased over the last couple of days. Again in my neck of the woods in one of the local supermarkets I only saw a couple of people wearing masks compared to a fair few more last week. People are getting frustrated(understandably), likely blase enough if they don't know anyone directly affected by this and more careless because of it.

Away With The Fairies

Wibbs wrote: »

They have taken their time, but again I'd not hold my breath. The HSE and govt have been reactive and lagging throughout. The problem is I think it may be too late unless they come out strongly in favour.

In my neck of the woods anyway, over the last two days both car and foot traffic is way up on last week. I mentioned this to a chap in the local garage while I getting petrol and he confirmed that their footfall has increased over the last couple of days. Again in my neck of the woods in one of the local supermarkets I only saw a couple of people wearing masks compared to a fair few more last week. People are getting frustrated(understandably), likely blase enough if they don't know anyone directly affected by this and more careless because of it.

Yep, I went to town today to the shop and a change of scenery to where I usually go (all within 2km). I was expecting town to be quite and it very much wasn't.

fr336

Wibbs wrote: »

They have taken their time, but again I'd not hold my breath. The HSE and govt have been reactive and lagging throughout. The problem is I think it may be too late unless they come out strongly in favour.

In my neck of the woods anyway, over the last two days both car and foot traffic is way up on last week. I mentioned this to a chap in the local garage while I getting petrol and he confirmed that their footfall has increased over the last couple of days. Again in my neck of the woods in one of the local supermarkets I only saw a couple of people wearing masks compared to a fair few more last week. People are getting frustrated(understandably), likely blase enough if they don't know anyone directly affected by this and more careless because of it.

I can "get" the coming out again even if I find it selfish and stupid, but why not wear a mask? Because you don't want to look silly?

fr336

snoopboggybog wrote: »

Its pretty sad people are laughing at people for wearing masks.

The infantilsation of the west.

Kivaro

There is a reason why this virus is so contagious, and it's not all about the discharge of droplets onto surfaces where others pick it up.
It is more to do with this (a few posts up):
the virus "can stay infectious in the air for more than 12 hours."

2 months ago I decided that this must be the case, as it was the only logical explanation for the rate of spread of this virus. I am not a doctor, and I do not play one on TV, but I think that Ireland has been extremely lucky so far with RO without the use of masks. Everyone in this country should be getting masks supplied to them in the post, and it is a very bad idea for the HSE and government to procrastinate implementing nationwide "masking" any further.

fr336

The staying in the air for 12 hours thing...hmm. Surely the case rates would be far higher if this was the case and the spread far faster? Things have been bad, especially in more densely populated countries, but that bad? I know the testing is a joke in most places but I'd have thought if it was that contagious we'd be seeing even more hospitalisations?

2u2me

fr336 wrote: »

The staying in the air for 12 hours thing...hmm. Surely the case rates would be far higher if this was the case and the spread far faster? Things have been bad, especially in more densely populated countries, but that bad? I know the testing is a joke in most places but I'd have thought if it was that contagious we'd be seeing even more hospitalisations?

No, not necessarily because you need enough of a viral load to be infected, a few stray particles isn't enough. (There has to be a certain amount in the air)

As long as you dilute the air enough it shouldn't be anything to worry about.

Kivaro

fr336 wrote: »

The staying in the air for 12 hours thing...hmm. Surely the case rates would be far higher if this was the case and the spread far faster? Things have been bad, especially in more densely populated countries, but that bad? I know the testing is a joke in most places but I'd have thought if it was that contagious we'd be seeing even more hospitalisations?

For me, it's all about the viral load, and possibly the type of mutation (if it is indeed occurring), which I was reading about earlier.
Wondered a while back why healthy young doctors were dying; the load was too much for them.

Jim_Hodge

Kivaro wrote: »

For me, it's all about the viral load, and possibly the type of mutation (if it is indeed occurring), which I was reading about earlier.
Wondered a while back why healthy young doctors were dying; the load was too much for them.

A close relative in one of the busiest hospitals has said that viral load in the absolute key problem with most of the deaths they have encountered and in those most critically ill.

Away With The Fairies

Kivaro wrote: »

There is a reason why this virus is so contagious, and it's not all about the discharge of droplets onto surfaces where others pick it up.
It is more to do with this (a few posts up):
the virus "can stay infectious in the air for more than 12 hours."

2 months ago I decided that this must be the case, as it was the only logical explanation for the rate of spread of this virus. I am not a doctor, and I do not play one on TV, but I think that Ireland has been extremely lucky so far with RO without the use of masks. Everyone in this country should be getting masks supplied to them in the post, and it is a very bad idea for the HSE and government to procrastinate implementing nationwide "masking" any further.

Not only supply masks to everyone but also teachings on how to use them. Saw a guy today with a face mask below his nose... What is the whole point of he sneezed?

Away With The Fairies

I think the use of masks is coming for us... But can they really continue with the crazy prices they have been charging for masks in the shops?

fr336

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

I think the use of masks is coming for us... But can they really continue with the crazy prices they have been charging for masks in the shops?

I'd like to know where to get one in a "proper" shop. Actually I haven't even tried in fairness but I can't see the local chemist having any at the moment, they certainly didn't in Feb/March. I've been experimenting (one word for it) with ones off Amazon and Ebay.

2u2me

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

I think the use of masks is coming for us...

I noticed a lot more people using them in my local Dunnes today, a lot more than a few weeks ago when the lockdown first started. Just my experience so maybe not a true representation!

Away With The Fairies

fr336 wrote: »

I'd like to know where to get one in a "proper" shop. Actually I haven't even tried in fairness but I can't see the local chemist having any at the moment, they certainly didn't in Feb/March. I've been experimenting (one word for it) with ones off Amazon and Ebay.

My local chemist did have masks but it was 8 euro for a pack of 4, so I walked out without them. I can make my own but I don't want to see places charging such crazy prices. Not for face masks.

Supercell

If/when these becomes obligatory I would hope they are at least tax deductible, with a family of five costs will mount quickly if we are all out and about when the restrictions are eased.
Forget about kids getting multiple uses from them, my lot barely get that from trousers and shoes as it is.

paddy19

cnocbui wrote: »

https://www.smh.com.au/national/warning-light-coronavirus-can-last-longer-in-air-than-first-thought-20200420-p54li8.html

Mask up.

"The work has not yet been put through rigorous peer review"

So let's not "mask up" the whole nation based on studies that have not even been peer reviewed.