Masks

na1 wrote: »

The new regulation says nothing about surgical masks or respirators!
Any proof that 'face covering' helps protecting us from COVID?
Any scientific research?

"Carbon" Mask for 20 euro? Or a piece of cotton (net cost 5с) for 1e each?
No thanks!

A quick Google will show peer reviewed research backing up the idea that face coverings, with other measures can reduce the spread of infections.

Here's one for example. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340603522_Face_Masks_Against_COVID-19_An_Evidence_Review

I'm talking actual research, peer reviewed. Not some quack on YouTube telling you that masks reduce your VO2 levels with absolutely no controls or proper research done.

Sconsey wrote: »

Here...70 scientific papers to get you started...all conclude that masks help prevent the spread of virus...
https://threader.app/thread/1279144399897866248

Not that I expect you will read any of them

What masks? I was talking about face covering

circadian wrote: »

A quick Google will show peer reviewed research backing up the idea that face coverings, with other measures can reduce the spread of infections.

Here you are to start with:

Trials and Studies on mask use:
https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy

Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 – 419.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/

N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.

Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/face-masks-to-prevent-transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic-review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05
bin-Reza et al. (2012) “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267.

Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016

Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) “Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934–1942,

Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) “N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824–833.

“Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. ... Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

Long, Y. et al. (2020) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1- 9.

Arrival

na1 wrote: »

The new regulation says nothing about surgical masks or respirators!
Any proof that 'face covering' helps protecting us from COVID?
Any scientific research?

"Carbon" Mask for 20 euro? Or a piece of cotton (net cost 5с) for 1e each?
No thanks!

STILL retards only thinking about masks being used to protect us and not the actual use of protecting others. When are the government going to come out and explain the actual logic behind masks in very basic and straightforward terms for the challenged amongst us to finally get it - only 5 months in now!

UrbanFret

Section 8 of the 2005 Act places a duty on employers to supply PPE where risks cannot be eliminated or adequately controlled. Section 13 of the 2005 Act places a duty on employees, having regard to their training and instructions, to make correct use of PPE.

circadian wrote: »

Here's one for example. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340603522_Face_Masks_Against_COVID-19_An_Evidence_Review
e.

Have you actually read what you have googled?))))

The results of the study show that the group with a regular supply of newsurgical masks each day had signiﬁcantly lower infection ofrhinovirus than the group that wore a limited supply of clothmasks.

Arrival wrote: »

STILL retards only thinking about masks being used to protect us and not the actual use of protecting others. When are the government going to come out and explain the actual logic behind masks in very basic and straightforward terms for the challenged amongst us to finally get it - only 5 months in now!

Still retards thinking that the piece of diaper over their face is snooze-proof.

na1 wrote: »

Have you actually read what you have googled?))))

Yes, that doesn't mean that the cloth masks were useless, just less effective.

na1 wrote: »

What masks? I was talking about face covering

Yeah I knew you wouldn't read the link...70 papers contradicting your view so you resort to semantics...here face coverings https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-2567

This is the first one I cam accross I am sure there are many more.

GT89

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

It's every employees duties to follow their employer's rules and policies on health and safety. You actually signed up for it. Masks are just a new measure to go along with every other health and safety policy your workplace has.

So such health and safety rules don't apply to bus drivers but do apply to retail staff. If the employers were doing to protect employees they'd provide us with N95 or FFP2 masks but the only masks they'll likely give us are surgucal or cloth masks.

Hurrache

na1 wrote: »

Still retards thinking that the piece of diaper over their face is snooze-proof.

With the crap coming out of you, your face is the best place for a nappy.

If you were supplied with FFP2/3 would you wear it for your shift?

GT89

railer201 wrote: »

The argument against masks was never found - there is none. Masks are just as an important weapon in the armoury against this killer virus as social distancing and hand washing - not just an optional extra.

Mask it or Casket

But only if work in retail and not if your a bus driver

circadian wrote: »

Yes, that doesn't mean that the cloth masks were useless, just less effective.

Much less effective than covering your face with elbow.

BUT: we have millions of cloth-masks imported at a price about 10 times higher than manufacturing costs, and the businesses want they money back. Coincidence?

na1 wrote: »

Much less effective than covering your face with elbow.

BUT: we have millions of cloth-masks imported at a price about 10 times higher than manufacturing costs, and the businesses want they money back. Coincidence?

I'm going to be frank with you here, I'm not going to get into a debate about some great manufacturing conspiracy while I have friends on ventilators.

Hurrache wrote: »

With the crap coming out of you, your face is the best place for a nappy.

how sweet! That really shows us who the mask-crusaders are, and why shouldn't we listen to them!

na1 wrote: »

Much less effective than covering your face with elbow.

BUT: we have millions of cloth-masks imported at a price about 10 times higher than manufacturing costs, and the businesses want they money back. Coincidence?

Wait, wait, wait...so you acknowledge that masks/face coverings are effective now just less effective than covering face with elbow? so you have decided to pivot your argement over to some kind of economic/commercial scam now instead?

GT89

circadian wrote: »

If you were supplied with FFP2/3 would you wear it for your shift?

Well if I had too maybe I would. No because I don't think it's nessecary. It's to protect customers not staff.

na1 wrote: »

how sweet! That really shows us who the mask-crusaders are, and why shouldn't we listen to them!

Were you the one that called face coverings nappies? why should anyone listen to you?

runswithascript

Mask should have been made mandatory months ago, instead of the Fine Gael government hmming and hawing over their effectiveness. Still the government have not gone far enough - they should be mandatory in all workspaces.

GT89 wrote: »

Well if I had too maybe I would. No because I don't think it's nessecary. It's to protect customers not staff.

GT89 wrote: »

So such health and safety rules don't apply to bus drivers but do apply to retail staff. If the employers were doing to protect employees they'd provide us with N95 or FFP2 masks but the only masks they'll likely give us are surgucal or cloth masks.

So even if they supplied you with that grade of mask, you probably wouldn't wear it despite previously stating that if the employer was trying to protect employees they'd provide that grade.

Sconsey wrote: »

Wait, wait, wait...so you acknowledge that masks/face coverings are effective now just less effective than covering face with elbow? so you have decided to pivot your argement over to some kind of economic/commercial scam now instead?

I did acknowledge that surgical masks are more effective than face cloth.

I did NOT acknowledge that compulsory use of cloth face cover helps preventing spread of COVID! There is noting about it in the article, sorry.

Sconsey wrote: »

Were you the one that called face coverings nappies? why should anyone listen to you?

If you noticed I was replying to retards posts:

STILL retards only thinking about masks being used to protect us and not the actual use of protecting others. When are the government going to come out and explain the actual logic behind masks in very basic and straightforward terms for the challenged amongst us to finally get it - only 5 months in now!

Lolamontez wrote: »

https://www.copperclothing.com/product/copper-infused-face-mask/
Any thoughts on these copper infused masks?

They are very good for the retailers pockets!

Away With The Fairies

GT89 wrote: »

So such health and safety rules don't apply to bus drivers but do apply to retail staff. If the employers were doing to protect employees they'd provide us with N95 or FFP2 masks but the only masks they'll likely give us are surgucal or cloth masks.

Why include bus drivers in your argument? They have screens protecting them.

N95 masks are used in hospital settings, like on a covid ward where they probably can't get someone on a ventilator wearing a mask but there's a huge risk in intubating and working with these patients so they wear N95 masks.

The whole point of wearing surgical masks is that you prevent spreading infection. Just do what's right and wear a mask.

Arrival

na1 wrote: »

Still retards thinking that the piece of diaper over their face is snooze-proof.

You can actually do an easy test on even homemade masks to see if they're effective at catching your breath/droplets: breathe heavily and cough towards a mirror and see if there's much condensation, if there isn't then your homemade mask is doing a decent job at catching and containing your potentially infectious droplets

Anyway, homemade masks were suggested due to supply issues and out of desperation stemming from that but it seems like we've a decent supply lately anyway, so I'd go with surgical masks because they're easier to breathe in and less stuffy

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

The whole point of wearing surgical masks is that you prevent spreading infection. Just do what's right and wear a mask.

I didn't see any mention of the surgical mask in the published transport regulations from the State, did you?

na1 wrote: »

If you noticed I was replying to retards posts:

So if someone says something you find offensive you can make an ignorant reply and it is OK....but if someone else reciprocates to your offensive remark with an ignorant reply they are problem?

In other words it's ok for you to do it but not for anyone else.

You're some piece of work.

Arrival wrote: »

You can actually do an easy test on even homemade masks to see if they're effective at catching your breath/droplets: breathe heavily and cough towards a mirror and see if there's much condensation, if there isn't then your homemade mask is doing a decent job at catching and containing your potentially infectious droplets

There was a video few pages down about homemade 'masks' and their efficiency.
And after leaving the shop, people tend to pull the mask down with their bare hands, touching their faces etc, and then pulling mask up again when they enter another shop or bus. This makes the 'mask' efficiency from (for example) 10% to 0%.