To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Seanergy · 13-11-2020 12:49PM

Just back from Chadwicks builder providers, 1000's of masks @1 euro in baskets by the tills. Two different types, 1 being sold as non medical and the other as a dust mask, so bought 1 of each as they both looked top grade. On closer inspection(out of the packaging and light tested) they both fail.

KN95 RINGMAN FDA APPROVED MASK being packaged and sold as non medical is riddeled with holes. I will be returning this to chadwicks as it fails H&S standards for what I require it for.

The other dust mask just came in clear packaging and had only one hole where the elastic for the ear strap is welded, bottom right, it's difficult taking shots of holes in masks with sunlight, not a great photo of the hole but as you can see the mask is more solid looking where the induction welding has been stamped.

I will just put a dab of hot glue on the hole and use this mask.

Both of these masks could just as easily been stamped with the SWIFT19 seal of approval. Heads up people, inspect your masks after purchase and from time to time if reusing don't trust packaging or sales people.

brianhere · 15-11-2020 02:19PM

This goes into the science of the efficacy of mask wearing to quite a degree, and shows it to be proven to be bad for your health and those around you: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=216546 .

Graham · 15-11-2020 02:20PM

Any credible sources?

brianhere · 15-11-2020 02:22PM

Yes he quotes countless scientific studies on this.

EyesClosed · 15-11-2020 02:35PM

brianhere wrote: »

This goes into the science of the efficacy of mask wearing to quite a degree, and shows it to be proven to be bad for your health and those around you: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=216546 .

Had a look at the site there. Everything from the illuminati to the anti christ all in one place. So I'm guessing his mask research is in the same area of insanity.

Graham · 15-11-2020 03:30PM

brianhere wrote: »

Yes he quotes countless scientific studies on this.

How about linking to the credible sources rather than pointing us to a site that warns of the dangers of 5G and specialised vote-flipping software solutions?

You might want to recalibrate your definition of credible. That link isn't it.

saneman · 15-11-2020 07:05PM

brianhere wrote: »

This goes into the science of the efficacy of mask wearing to quite a degree, and shows it to be proven to be bad for your health and those around you: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=216546 .

brianhere wrote: »

Yes he quotes countless scientific studies on this.

Nope, not countless, 8 in fact.

And what this "Truthseeker" actually does is cite another article by a Denis G. Rancourt, PhD (his PhD is in "I don't know what" to quote him directly!!) which further references those 8 studies.

None of the studies cited concluded what Rancourt says they did (and therefore also your "truthsayer"). For example, six of the eight studies measured the effectiveness of N95 respirators compared to surgical masks—not, as Rancourt/truthsayer implied, the effectiveness of wearing a mask vs. not wearing a mask.

So what we have is one individual citing another individual, citing 8 studies and misrepresenting the results laid out in those studies.

I've already spent too much time on that fúcking nonsense so do the rest of the reading yourself:

https://davidkylejohnson.wordpress.com/2020/07/28/a-complete-debunking-of-denis-rancourts-argument-that-masks-dont-work/

Away With The Fairies · 15-11-2020 07:10PM

Can I post a bargain alert here? Mr Price had a box of 50 masks for 4.99.

odyssey06 · 15-11-2020 07:54PM

brianhere wrote: »

This goes into the science of the efficacy of mask wearing to quite a degree, and shows it to be proven to be bad for your health and those around you: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=216546 .

The dishonest conspiracy theory nutjobs you link dump to are bad for your health at all times with the garbage they put out.

martingriff · 16-11-2020 12:29AM

brianhere wrote: »

This goes into the science of the efficacy of mask wearing to quite a degree, and shows it to be proven to be bad for your health and those around you: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=216546 .

Better tell doctor, nurses, dentists etc this

Seanergy · 16-11-2020 07:05PM

Free talk/event wednesday 2pm might be of interest.

https://www.eventbrite.ie/x/advanced-imaging-techniques-to-understand-the-transport-of-the-virus-in-air-tickets-123202069707

https://twitter.com/Matersurgery/status/1328375407712854024

Seanergy · 18-11-2020 08:43PM

GARDAÍ ARE APPEALING for witnesses to an incident on a Luas tram earlier this month which involved anti-mask protesters.

https://www.thejournal.ie/gardai-appeal-for-witnesses-luas-no-face-mask-5270977-Nov2020

Wibbs · 19-11-2020 11:13AM

Graham wrote: »

How about linking to the credible sources rather than pointing us to a site that warns of the dangers of 5G and specialised vote-flipping software solutions?

You might want to recalibrate your definition of credible. That link isn't it.

You might want to check out the link in his sig, it'll recalibrate your definition of incredible. Marian apparitions and all.

BrianD3 · 19-11-2020 12:02PM

I haven't been following this thread so this may have been discussed already - i see a lot of people on TV, sky news etc. wearing what appear to be valved disposable respirators. They have a prominent 3M logo on the front which looks like a valve cover, is this the case. If as we keep being told, masks are to "protect others rather than the wearer" then valved respirators would not function as well as a non valved and this should be pointed out.

If everyone was wearing non valved respirators rather than "face coverings" or surgical masks would we be seeing fewer cases, at the very least it is easier to wear a respirator correctly as they don't fall off the nose. I have personally encountered healthcare professionals including a GP wearing surgical masks below their nose.

On a somewhat related subject and going back to my earlier posts in the thread, i never did wear the Sundstrom respirator and the replacement filters that I paid a fair amount for on ebay are still in their packaging.

Away With The Fairies · 19-11-2020 12:11PM

BrianD3 wrote: »

I haven't been following this thread so this may have been discussed already - i see a lot of people on TV, sky news etc. wearing what appear to be valved disposable respirators. They have a prominent 3M logo on the front which looks like a valve cover, is this the case. If as we keep being told, masks are to "protect others rather than the wearer" then valved respirators would not function as well as a non valved and this should be pointed out.

If everyone was wearing non valved respirators rather than "face coverings" or surgical masks would we be seeing fewer cases, at the very least it is easier to wear a respirator correctly as they don't fall off the nose. I have personally encountered healthcare professionals including a GP wearing surgical masks below their nose.

On a somewhat related subject and going back to my earlier posts in the thread, i never did wear the Sundstrom respirator and the replacement filters that I paid a fair amount for on ebay are still in their packaging.

You would like to point out the issue with valved masks???

Thanks for the laugh this morning. The issue on visors was pointed out and it went ignored.

odyssey06 · 19-11-2020 12:13PM

BrianD3 wrote: »

I haven't been following this thread so this may have been discussed already - i see a lot of people on TV, sky news etc. wearing what appear to be valved disposable respirators. They have a prominent 3M logo on the front which looks like a valve cover, is this the case. If as we keep being told, masks are to "protect others rather than the wearer" then valved respirators would not function as well as a non valved and this should be pointed out.
If everyone was wearing non valved respirators rather than "face coverings" or surgical masks would we be seeing fewer cases, at the very least it is easier to wear a respirator correctly as they don't fall off the nose. I have personally encountered healthcare professionals including a GP wearing surgical masks below their nose.
On a somewhat related subject and going back to my earlier posts in the thread, i never did wear the Sundstrom respirator and the replacement filters that I paid a fair amount for on ebay are still in their packaging.

Yes, I am reading in India they advised against use of such masks for this reason:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/miscellaneous/why-the-government-wants-you-to-stop-wearing-a-valved-n95-mask/valve-issues/slideshow/77164635.cms

patnor1011 · 19-11-2020 06:02PM

Someone reacted on mask insanity, well worth to read:

I was trained as a chemist. A large part of my professional career was working in various parts of the filtration industry. I developed a line of mixed esters of cellulose membrane filters. Millipore type filters, that were used to sterilize flu vaccines for Merck Sharp and Dohme as well as other medical products companies. I developed respiratory protection products for Wilson Safety Products used in the mining industry. I worked for Baxter developing medical / IV filters. I have patents on three IV filters I invented. Baxter sold more than 5 million of one of those every year for most of a decade. I know a little bit about filters.

Surgical masks were not designed as filters and were not intended to be used as filters. Surgical masks were designed to be used by surgeons standing face down over an operating table holding a patient with an open wound. The surgeon wearing the mask would be able to talk to others in the room without discharging spittle droplets into the patient's wound. Spittle droplets are large and can cause infection.

I witnessed a test of surgical masks. Small plaster particles were generated in a room. They were visible as a white dust in the air. A man was properly fitted with a surgical mask and spent a short time in the room. When he came out the mask was removed. A camera was focused on the man’s face. The entire area that had been covered by the mask was coated by the white dust. The camera showed that his nostrils and his mouth had been penetrated by the white dust. The dust particles were measured and found to be around 40 micrometers in diameter. The particles that penetrated the mask were the same diameter.

Covid-19 virus molecules are about 0.1 micrometers in diameter. That is 400 times smaller than the plaster particles that penetrated the mask.

Surgical masks will not prevent the wearer from inhaling or exhaling viruses or bacteria. They provide absolutely no protection for either the wearer or anyone nearby. They create a very dangerous false sense of security for everyone. They also force the wearer to rebreath carbon dioxide. Which will over time reduce the wearers blood oxygen level. That can become very dangerous especially for older people.

This farce is being promoted by sleazy politicians who believe that if they can convince people that they are protecting them or creating a safe environment for them by pushing this mask farce those people will re-elect them.

All politicians pushing this dangerous mask farce should be voted out of office as soon as possible.

saneman · 19-11-2020 06:45PM

patnor1011 wrote: »

Someone reacted on mask insanity, well worth to read:

I was trained as a chemist. A large part of my professional career was working in various parts of the filtration industry. I developed a line of mixed esters of cellulose membrane filters. Millipore type filters, that were used to sterilize flu vaccines for Merck Sharp and Dohme as well as other medical products companies. I developed respiratory protection products for Wilson Safety Products used in the mining industry. I worked for Baxter developing medical / IV filters. I have patents on three IV filters I invented. Baxter sold more than 5 million of one of those every year for most of a decade. I know a little bit about filters.

Surgical masks were not designed as filters and were not intended to be used as filters. Surgical masks were designed to be used by surgeons standing face down over an operating table holding a patient with an open wound. The surgeon wearing the mask would be able to talk to others in the room without discharging spittle droplets into the patient's wound. Spittle droplets are large and can cause infection.

I witnessed a test of surgical masks. Small plaster particles were generated in a room. They were visible as a white dust in the air. A man was properly fitted with a surgical mask and spent a short time in the room. When he came out the mask was removed. A camera was focused on the man’s face. The entire area that had been covered by the mask was coated by the white dust. The camera showed that his nostrils and his mouth had been penetrated by the white dust. The dust particles were measured and found to be around 40 micrometers in diameter. The particles that penetrated the mask were the same diameter.

Covid-19 virus molecules are about 0.1 micrometers in diameter. That is 400 times smaller than the plaster particles that penetrated the mask.

Surgical masks will not prevent the wearer from inhaling or exhaling viruses or bacteria. They provide absolutely no protection for either the wearer or anyone nearby. They create a very dangerous false sense of security for everyone. They also force the wearer to rebreath carbon dioxide. Which will over time reduce the wearers blood oxygen level. That can become very dangerous especially for older people.

This farce is being promoted by sleazy politicians who believe that if they can convince people that they are protecting them or creating a safe environment for them by pushing this mask farce those people will re-elect them.

All politicians pushing this dangerous mask farce should be voted out of office as soon as possible.

Where did you find that lovely piece of prose seeing as you haven't cited it?

Was it here? (in comments): https://jordanschachtel.substack.com/p/dr-quack-cdcs-redfield-claims-masks

Or maybe here?: https://lampasshole.com/tag/masks-are-useless/

I'm not gonna post the 4chan link, no one needs that.

I'm sure there are more appropriate places for copy/pasting works of fiction than here, thanks.

makemineawine · 19-11-2020 07:12PM

Have to admit I haven't been following the threads but witnessed something yesterday that has prompted this post. I was in my local Lidl and witnessed an incident in the store regarding masks. I saw a woman who I would have estimated to be 50 ish in age. She was shopping in the store and not wearing a mask. An older woman approached her and handed her a mask that she had purchased and asked her to wear it. The first woman refused saying she had a medical condition which absolved her. Perhaps she had, but I have to say it was not something obvious. I would be the first to say that it can be difficult to identify people who fall into that bracket whilst some conditions (such as needing oxygen therapy) are immediately obvious to those around them who can therefore make allowances. My question is who is in the right? My family and I are following the guidelines - working from home, only leaving to stock up on necessary provisions and always trying to bulk buy to reduce the trips from the house, wearing masks and/or gloves when out and using hand sanitizers everywhere they are available. And yet again, as I watch the news, the numbers are increasing ....................

CalamariFritti · 19-11-2020 07:19PM

makemineawine wrote: »

Have to admit I haven't been following the threads but witnessed something yesterday that has prompted this post. I was in my local Lidl and witnessed an incident in the store regarding masks. I saw a woman who I would have estimated to be 50 ish in age. She was shopping in the store and not wearing a mask. An older woman approached her and handed her a mask that she had purchased and asked her to wear it. The first woman refused saying she had a medical condition which absolved her. Perhaps she had, but I have to say it was not something obvious. I would be the first to say that it can be difficult to identify people who fall into that bracket whilst some conditions (such as needing oxygen therapy) are immediately obvious to those around them who can therefore make allowances. My question is who is in the right? My family and I are following the guidelines - working from home, only leaving to stock up on necessary provisions and always trying to bulk buy to reduce the trips from the house, wearing masks and/or gloves when out and using hand sanitizers everywhere they are available. And yet again, as I watch the news, the numbers are increasing ....................

Its because the fact that those masks we wear has next to nothing effect on the spread of this virus. Gloves are on outright liability. Nobody wears gloves.

And I dont want to be that anti guy but those hand sanitizers? Like you're coming from home out of your car why would you need hand sanitiser? Often from a single dispenser. Something that everyone entering the shop is asked to touch. Why the f*** would I want to touch that?

patnor1011 · 19-11-2020 08:03PM

saneman wrote: »

Where did you find that lovely piece of prose seeing as you haven't cited it?

Was it here? (in comments): https://jordanschachtel.substack.com/p/dr-quack-cdcs-redfield-claims-masks

Or maybe here?: https://lampasshole.com/tag/masks-are-useless/

I'm not gonna post the 4chan link, no one needs that.

I'm sure there are more appropriate places for copy/pasting works of fiction than here, thanks.

We are being fed with work of fiction by RTE or our politicians daily. Not exclusively covid related.
And here I actually say that even though surcigal mask is crap and does not much to protect you or others they are still better than single layer stretchy fabric masks majority of the people wear around. Whole mask issue is just PR excercise to show we do something when there is not much we can do at this stage anyway.

NovemberWren · 19-11-2020 08:51PM

there may be 1 million passengers on Bus Eireann buses?

how many have been fined the E2,500.00 ?

Though bus drivers themselves are denying people attain 'any future buses'; when they deem a mask is not acceptable to them; or, when the monitoring station Synergy Security, deems so, and directs action to the driver via the earpiece.

makemineawine · 19-11-2020 09:13PM

Kinda sorry now I posted at all ..................... I will be the first to say I have no medical training. I have no idea if the masks or gloves or hand santisers are necessary. I wouldn't want to be a politician making all these decisions at the moment - it seems you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. Hindsight is going to be a wonderful way for us to criticise. I personally think they are doing the best they can, given the circumstances. My family have chosen to follow the guidelines and thankfully we have not had a single person within the group who has even had a scare of being infected. For all those who disagree, you are of course entitled to your opinion. I'm curious as to why you would think that so many have bought into this whole consipiracy. Also, I'd be grateful if you would supply the health service with your name and PPS number. At least then when the A&E Departments start to become over run with admissions, they will be able to give preference to those people who tried to stop the spread of this disease. You of course on the other hand won't need any of the specialised treatment or expertise of the staff, because this virus is all a huge conspiracy ................

Seanergy · 19-11-2020 09:28PM

XPRIZE MASK voting is open. link

Some pretty cool tweaks but loads of trash enteries.

This mask with it's inflatable tubing for better seal and plastic cones for voice amplification got my vote. Second place for me was the removable mask, just not into magnetic strips, lost too much data over the years....

odyssey06 · 19-11-2020 09:36PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Its because the fact that those masks we wear has next to nothing effect on the spread of this virus. Gloves are on outright liability. Nobody wears gloves.
And I dont want to be that anti guy but those hand sanitizers? Like you're coming from home out of your car why would you need hand sanitiser? Often from a single dispenser. Something that everyone entering the shop is asked to touch. Why the f*** would I want to touch that?

Sure, what's the problem, they've just come from home out of their car too so why would you have a problem with what they touch?
If you think about it, you'll have answered your own question as to why your hands will be safer to others after you have sanitised them.

And as you can't sanitise your lungs after you have inhaled someone else's germs you are asked to wear a mask to contain yours from being inhaled by others, and other people are asked to wear them to contain theirs.

NovemberWren · 19-11-2020 11:07PM

Seanergy wrote: »

XPRIZE MASK voting is open. link

Some pretty cool tweaks but loads of trash enteries.

This mask with it's inflatable tubing for better seal and plastic cones for voice amplification got my vote. Second place for me was the removable mask, just not into magnetic strips, lost too much data over the years....

The best options to these are, Diving Cylinders. The Scuba Diving Cylinders look safe and are not a bad price, on Amazon circa E150.00.

But Snorkels are a good option too. [as the Cylinders strapped to the back may be a bit heavy].

Away With The Fairies · 20-11-2020 12:52AM

patnor1011 wrote: »

Someone reacted on mask insanity, well worth to read:

I was trained as a chemist. A large part of my professional career was working in various parts of the filtration industry. I developed a line of mixed esters of cellulose membrane filters. Millipore type filters, that were used to sterilize flu vaccines for Merck Sharp and Dohme as well as other medical products companies. I developed respiratory protection products for Wilson Safety Products used in the mining industry. I worked for Baxter developing medical / IV filters. I have patents on three IV filters I invented. Baxter sold more than 5 million of one of those every year for most of a decade. I know a little bit about filters.

Surgical masks were not designed as filters and were not intended to be used as filters. Surgical masks were designed to be used by surgeons standing face down over an operating table holding a patient with an open wound. The surgeon wearing the mask would be able to talk to others in the room without discharging spittle droplets into the patient's wound. Spittle droplets are large and can cause infection.

I witnessed a test of surgical masks. Small plaster particles were generated in a room. They were visible as a white dust in the air. A man was properly fitted with a surgical mask and spent a short time in the room. When he came out the mask was removed. A camera was focused on the man’s face. The entire area that had been covered by the mask was coated by the white dust. The camera showed that his nostrils and his mouth had been penetrated by the white dust. The dust particles were measured and found to be around 40 micrometers in diameter. The particles that penetrated the mask were the same diameter.

Covid-19 virus molecules are about 0.1 micrometers in diameter. That is 400 times smaller than the plaster particles that penetrated the mask.

Surgical masks will not prevent the wearer from inhaling or exhaling viruses or bacteria. They provide absolutely no protection for either the wearer or anyone nearby. They create a very dangerous false sense of security for everyone. They also force the wearer to rebreath carbon dioxide. Which will over time reduce the wearers blood oxygen level. That can become very dangerous especially for older people.

This farce is being promoted by sleazy politicians who believe that if they can convince people that they are protecting them or creating a safe environment for them by pushing this mask farce those people will re-elect them.

All politicians pushing this dangerous mask farce should be voted out of office as soon as possible.

Your post started off so well. A trained chemist... And then a test where someone wore a mask in a dusty room. What was the result of that test? The face mask doesn't protect the wearer... Which was always the case.

Can you do another test? Perhaps someone blowing dust out of their mouth while wearing a face mask properly?

brianhere · 20-11-2020 03:35AM

Top pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson, also an expert virologist he is the CEO of a biotech company that manufactures COVID tests, has been advising the government in Canada on the correct measures to take here.

Hodkinson remarked that “social distancing is useless because COVID is spread by aerosols which travel 30 meters or so before landing,” as he called for society to be re-opened immediately to prevent the debilitating damage being caused by lockdowns.

Hodkinson also slammed mandatory mask mandates as completely pointless:
“Masks are utterly useless. There is no evidence base for their effectiveness whatsoever,” he said.
“Paper masks and fabric masks are simply virtue signalling. They’re not even worn effectively most of the time. It’s utterly ridiculous. Seeing these unfortunate, uneducated people – I’m not saying that in a pejorative sense – seeing these people walking around like lemmings obeying without any knowledge base to put the mask on their face.”
( https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/top-pathologist-claims-covid-19-greatest-hoax-ever-perpetrated-unsuspecting-public .)

odyssey06 · 20-11-2020 09:16AM

brianhere wrote: »

Top pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson, also an expert virologist he is the CEO of a biotech company that manufactures COVID tests, has been advising the government in Canada on the correct measures to take here.

Hodkinson remarked that “social distancing is useless because COVID is spread by aerosols which travel 30 meters or so before landing,” as he called for society to be re-opened immediately to prevent the debilitating damage being caused by lockdowns.

Hodkinson also slammed mandatory mask mandates as completely pointless:
“Masks are utterly useless. There is no evidence base for their effectiveness whatsoever,” he said.
“Paper masks and fabric masks are simply virtue signalling. They’re not even worn effectively most of the time. It’s utterly ridiculous. Seeing these unfortunate, uneducated people – I’m not saying that in a pejorative sense – seeing these people walking around like lemmings obeying without any knowledge base to put the mask on their face.”
( https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/top-pathologist-claims-covid-19-greatest-hoax-ever-perpetrated-unsuspecting-public .)

Can you provide a transcript of the advice he gave to the Canadian government and in what capacity?
It would be good to see what evidence he has to support his claims.
(Of course I don't expect that he does)

He does not appear to be an advisor to the Canadian government.
He made the comments to a committee of Edmonton city council.

Nor does he appear to be an expert virologist.

He also said this is "no worse than a bad flu" and "social distancing is useless".
But he doesn't seem concerned about a virus that is spreading 30 metres by aerosols, according to his 'claims'.

He feels so strongly about his public views that he is too busy to further expand on his views to local newspapers who sought follow-up interviews.
Kinda says it all.

Graham · 20-11-2020 09:41AM

brianhere wrote: »

Top pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson, also an expert virologist he is the CEO of a biotech company that manufactures COVID tests, has been advising the government in Canada on the correct measures to take here.

How is he a top pathologist and expert virologist hasn't he been non-practicing for over 20 years?

Now CEO of an ambulance chasing operation in Canada.

To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Comments