Poll of the Day > It pisses me off that some people can't comprehend who a mask protects.

(+) Yeah! (+)

If I wear a mask, it protects others from me. So no, I'm not protected by my mask if dumbfucks around me don't wear one. At no point has it been stated that that's how it works.
---

Technically it does both, but it's better at protecting others than it is at protecting you. Any small barrier between your breath holes and their breath holes is gonna help a bit, which is why I've taken to anal inhalation for improved safety (but the smell is terrible).

---

In general people don't seem to understand how a mask works. "it traps the carbon dioxide in the mask and you suffocate!" so you somehow think it blocks a virus, but not a molecule orders of magnitude smaller than the virus???

---

Yea why would people have trouble comprehending it when the boxes say they don't do what everyone says they will.

GanonsSpirit posted...

If I wear a mask, it protects others from me. So no, I'm not protected by my mask if dumbfucks around me don't wear one. At no point has it been stated that that's how it works.

Except that's literally part of how PPE works.


---

Blightzkrieg posted...

Technically it does both, but it's better at protecting others than it is at protecting you.

Isn't it like a 5% reduction in infection rates if you're wearing one and not the infected?
---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Isn't it like a 5% reduction in infection rates if you're wearing one and not the infected?

Something like that yeah. Any little bit helps though. You're never gonna get 100% protection

---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Isn't it like a 5% reduction in infection rates if you're wearing one and not the infected?

More like 3%, and only if it's well-fitted to seal over mouth and nose, and of effective material. Otherwise it's just a politically-correct fashion statement.

---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Isn't it like a 5% reduction in infection rates if you're wearing one and not the infected?

I can't find the link now, but I recall seeing a study of other respiratory viruses that showed a 10-30% effectiveness rate for the wearer, depending on the type of mask, how well it fit, and adherence.

---

Most of the limitations in masks' effectiveness for personal protection is a consequence of how readily we can contract respiratory infections through the eyes. Tear ducts are a direct line to the nasal passages, and we keep them nice and moist to help bacteria and viruses survive the trip. If you really want more personal protection, throw on a pair of goggles to complement the mask.

Zeus posted...

Except that's literally part of how PPE works.

Which is why masks generally haven't been branded as PPE throughout this pandemic. They're a public health recommendation, not a personal protective one. Yes, broadly, the devices are considered PPE, but that does not in any way mean that their purpose is always going to be personal protection. Context, yo.

---

Have you ever seen someones face after theyve done a day of drywall while wearing a mask? Yeah they dont do enough to save you bud.

Said it a ton of times, and I guess Ill say it again: You want to be safe, get on portable supplied-air and stay on it. Otherwise if youre that scared, dont go outside.

---

adjl posted...

Which is why masks generally haven't been branded as PPE throughout this pandemic. They're a public health recommendation, not a personal protective one. Yes, broadly, the devices are considered PPE, but that does not in any way mean that their purpose is always going to be personal protection. Context, yo.

N95s ARE masks and PPE. You're falsely suggesting that they're two separate categories.

---

zebatov posted...

Have you ever seen someones face after theyve done a day of drywall while wearing a mask? Yeah they dont do enough to save you bud.

Said it a ton of times, and I guess Ill say it again: You want to be safe, get on portable supplied-air and stay on it. Otherwise if youre that scared, dont go outside.

This guy is one of the people I'm referring to in the OP.
---

I mean what I stated is a fact. But if you really want to go around being fearful of everything by choice, thats on you. Dont blame others for that. Sounds more like you were talking about you.

I mean I work with the stuff so I might know what Im talking about.



---

Blightzkrieg posted...

Technically it does both

---

Life goes on.

With or without people who want to scream "misinformation" because they simply can't be wrong.

zebatov posted...

I mean what I stated is a fact. But if you really want to go around being fearful of everything by choice, thats on you. Dont blame others for that. Sounds more like you were talking about you.

I think whats hes saying is the mask isnt suppose to protect the wearer. Its suppose to protect others. So, when you wear a mask, its not to protect you from getting sick from other. But its suppose to protect others from getting sick from you...
---

LinkPizza posted...

I think whats hes saying is the mask isnt suppose to protect the wearer. Its suppose to protect others. So, when you wear a mask, its not to protect you from getting sick from other. But its suppose to protect others from getting sick from you...

Yeah I got that. They dont protect anyone. You need to be on supplied-air to be 100% protected. Rather than next to 0% that the masks give you. So realistically, in response to his title, he should be pissed-off at himself for not knowing who the mask protects.

---

zebatov posted...

I mean what I stated is a fact. But if you really want to go around being fearful of everything by choice, thats on you. Dont blame others for that. Sounds more like you were talking about you.

I mean I work with the stuff so I might know what Im talking about.

If the source of the drywall powder had a covering to catch it, it wouldn't get to you. The same way a mask catches droplets that the virus is on when the source of the virus wears one.

Like, I stated that wearing a mask doesn't protect me, and you refuted it by saying... that wearing a mask doesn't protect you?
---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Like, I stated that wearing a mask doesn't protect me, and you refuted it by saying... that wearing a mask doesn't protect you?

Congratulations, you played yourself.

Masks don't work.
Politically driven #scamdemic, from all sides

zebatov posted...

Have you ever seen someones face after theyve done a day of drywall while wearing a mask? Yeah they dont do enough to save you bud.

Said it a ton of times, and I guess Ill say it again: You want to be safe, get on portable supplied-air and stay on it. Otherwise if youre that scared, dont go outside.

do you wear a seatbelt

---

OniRonin posted...

do you wear a seatbelt

Yes, but not to protect others like is commonly argued.

Does a seatbelt actually stop me from getting through

GanonsSpirit posted...

If the source of the drywall powder had a covering to catch it, it wouldn't get to you. The same way a mask catches droplets that the virus is on when the source of the virus wears one.

How many hundreds of times larger do you think that dust that you can actually see on my hand is than a virus?

---

zebatov posted...

How many hundreds of times larger do you think that dust that you can actually see on my hand is than a virus?

Fun fact: Viruses can't fly. They hitch a ride on moisture droplets much larger than they are to travel through the air.
---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Fun fact: Viruses can't fly. They hitch a ride on moisture droplets much larger than they are to travel through the air.

Oh are those the things I can see or the things I cant see?

Just wondering because if the thing I can see - the rough, edged drywall dust - gets through, then Im uncertain what youre trying to get at.

You need a seal on your face. A fabric mask isnt going to cut it. Ive also worked in vessel entry, so I know all about negative pressure tests, proper seals and breathing while on air inside of a mask that prevents you from touching your face, if you have any further questions.

Ive also seen that video where they were trying to show your argument. It cuts back on how far the air you exhale travels, yes, but it doesnt stop the virus from fully getting through. And considering it doesnt take more than one or two particles to get you sick, whats the point?

---

Heres a study saying that the lockdowns and mask mandates didnt lead to a reduction of Covid transmission rates or deaths. Interesting read whether you agree with the facts they present or not.

https://www.aier.org/article/lockdowns-and-mask-mandates-do-not-lead-to-reduced-covid-transmission-rates-or-deaths-new-study-suggests/

Zeus posted...

N95s ARE masks and PPE. You're falsely suggesting that they're two separate categories.

Masks and PPE clearly are two separate categories. A zombie mask is not PPE, and steel-toed boots are not masks. N95's fall into both categories, but that doesn't mean both categories are of equal relevance in determining its function in a given circumstance. Things that can be used as PPE aren't always used just for personal protection. Context, yo.

zebatov posted...

Have you ever seen someones face after theyve done a day of drywall while wearing a mask? Yeah they dont do enough to save you bud.

Have you ever compared the faces of two people who have spent a day drywalling, one with and one without a mask? More saliently, have you ever compared their lungs after months or years of doing so (that being the actual reason for wearing the masks)? For that matter, given that we're not generally talking about a full day (given proper distancing protocols, close-range interactions with people should be fairly short-lived), how about making that comparison after 30 seconds of drywalling? Or perhaps with masks that fit properly, or are changed multiple times throughout the day to ensure they're clean enough for air to get through them?

Your example illustrates that masks are not 100% protection, but without a control group or efforts to ensure you're comparing analogous situations, your comparison isn't valid.

zebatov posted...

They dont protect anyone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6cTDGqcUpA

Obviously, that's not a dust mask, but it's also a test you can replicate yourself if you want to demonstrate that dust masks (or any other variety of mask) actually do nothing to protect anyone. Bill Nye's approach (try to blow out a candle while wearing one) also very nicely demonstrates how much they impede the movement of air (and therefore aerosol droplets), in addition to being substantially easier and less dangerous to try at home (though less flashy).

Science, wenches.

---

Again, one particle is enough to make you sick, so whats your point?

Bottom line, masks are essentially pointless, so calling people dumb fucks for not wearing them or being a business that requires them is really just telling about the intelligence of those individual entities. But hey, the execs at 3M are loving your guys support right now!

---

zebatov posted...

Again, one particle is enough to make you sick, so whats your point?

That dramatically reducing the distance those particles are able to travel and the number that do actually escape is unambiguously a good thing. It's not perfect and never will be, but that's no reason to give up on any sub-100% reduction. This is not an all-or-nothing situation, and the people insisting on characterizing it as one are idiots.

---

RedPixel posted...

Congratulations, you played yourself.

Masks don't work.
Politically driven #scamdemic, from all sides

How so?
---

just keep your distance then
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

just keep your distance then

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/538/731/0fc.gif

---

adjl I would like to hear your thoughts and feelings about the article I posted.

zebatov posted...

Again, one particle is enough to make you sick, so whats your point?

This is actually disingenuous. While a single virion CAN infect a person, there is a well-documented relationship between the number of virions one is exposed to, and the resulting severity of disease (or whether or not it results in disease at all). Each disease has its own "infectious dose" represented as the median number of bacteria or virions required to infect a person.

Masks don't reduce your virion emissions to zero. But they necessarily will reduce the number of virions expelled away from your immediate location, and/or reduce the distance they travel.

---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

just keep your distance then

... but I must be outraged at least once a day by what others are doing!


---

MartianManchild posted...

adjl I would like to hear your thoughts and feelings about the article I posted.

The main takeaway seems to be that governmental intervention policies are a poor predictor of changes in transmission rate in the epidemic.

To that I say no crap. Many people self-impose interventions like social distancing and mask wearing regardless of the law. Many businesses have done the same, encouraging employees to work from home when possible even if not legally required. At the same time, many people refuse to adhere to policies that have been enacted. Both of these factors reduce the association between policy and transmission rates

Besides, the whole premise of modeling infection rates ~ government intervention in this manner is a bit dubious, given that they're interdependent variables. You don't just have regions that stay '100% open' or '100% shut down,' they're changing over time. That's further going to weaken the association.


---

zebatov posted...

Again, one particle is enough to make you sick, so whats your point?

not necessarily at all

viral load is a big part of whether someone will become ill and how sick they could end up being

---

Clench281 posted...

This is actually disingenuous. While a single virion CAN infect a person, there is a well-documented relationship between the number of virions one is exposed to, and the resulting severity of disease (or whether or not it results in disease at all). Each disease has its own "infectious dose" represented as the median number of bacteria or virions required to infect a person.

Masks don't reduce your virion emissions to zero. But they necessarily will reduce the number of virions expelled away from your immediate location, and/or reduce the distance they travel.

Also that. Lower pathogen load=lower chance of infection/less severe infection. This is pretty intuitive: the body has a much easier time mounting an immune response against a smaller number of pathogens than a larger number. Some percentage of the virions that do manage to enter your body are also just going to fail to reproduce spontaneously, and having a smaller initial population exponentially increases the likelihood that the whole population will end up suffering such a fate.

You can end up with an infection from a single virus particle, but it's nonetheless true that being exposed to fewer virions is a good thing.

Clench281 posted...

The main takeaway seems to be that governmental intervention policies are a poor predictor of changes in transmission rate in the epidemic.

To that I say no crap. Many people self-impose interventions like social distancing and mask wearing regardless of the law. Many businesses have done the same, encouraging employees to work from home when possible even if not legally required. At the same time, many people refuse to adhere to policies that have been enacted. Both of these factors reduce the association between policy and transmission rates

Besides, the whole premise of modeling infection rates ~ government intervention in this manner is a bit dubious, given that they're interdependent variables. You don't just have regions that stay '100% open' or '100% shut down,' they're changing over time. That's further going to weaken the association.

Roughly my thoughts. I do have to question some of the premises presented, like there not being an increase in deaths per day after a certain point (there's a clear upward trend starting in late July for the US, albeit less of one than the initial spike) and not taking into account variations in countries' deaths per day (it's looking just at how much that figure changes), but the bottom line is that mandates tend to come into effect later than unofficial policies and recommendations that people have already been doing voluntarily. The CDC recommended masks long before any counties started passing mandates for using them, and a sizable number of people listened.

Broadly, mandates are passed to stomp out the last vestiges of resistance, not as a first line of public health. They exist to force everyone to follow what the proactive people are already doing, so naturally they're going to lag behind the effects of proactive people doing the things they mandate. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be happening or that the things they suggest are useless, it just means they aren't making all the difference.

Really, think about it: Does it really make sense to suggest that having the entire population try to minimize contact with other people wouldn't have a significant negative impact on the transmission of an airborne virus? That placing any sort of barrier in front of your face that limits the speed at which air (and, by extension, aerosols) leaves your mouth/nose wouldn't restrict transmission to some extent or another? The magnitude of these changes is, of course, going to have to be determined empirically and/or with far more complex modelling than any of us are capable of doing off-hand, but just looking at it intuitively, ask yourself what assumptions about the virus would have to be untrue for these control efforts to truly be as meaningless as you seem to want them to be. I'll give you a hint: "It's a virus" would be one of them.

---

GanonsSpirit posted...

At no point has it been stated that that's how it works.

At no point has it been stated that that's not how it works.

---

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

At no point has it been stated that that's not how it works.

People have been stating this for literally as long as Covid has had a presence in the western world.

---

Why didnt Oni reply to me yet? :(

wwinterj25 posted...

... but I must be outraged at least once a day by what others are doing!

---