Masks

JL555

AMKC wrote: »

So I was in Lidi doing my shopping today and when I was at the till there was a guy not at the till I was at but at the next one and he had his mask half on. What I mean buy that is he had it covering his mouth and not his nose. How utterly thick and selfish has someone got to be doing that. I wanted to say something and even thought of taking a picture but in the end I just gave him my angry eye look. I just hope the till assistant said something to him.

Careful now, could have been your own reflection in the perspex..

Atlantic Dawn

I still feel like I am about to take part in an armed robbery each time I put the mask on as I get out of my car.

Hawthorn Tree

No: I don't care enough

Masks help me notice and focus on the beautiful bright eyes that Irish women have.

Diamonds.

xhomelezz

Yes: valved

Hawthorn Tree wrote: »

Masks help me notice and focus on the beautiful bright eyes that Irish women have.

Diamonds.

Like this one. Forget about the boobs or legs and etc. Eyes are to watch for.

And I mean it!

odyssey06

political analyst wrote: »

On what grounds?

It's from testimony of the leader of the nurses’ union to the Oireachtas Committee:

https://extra.ie/2020/06/24/news/irish-news/inmo-government-frontline-workers

Search for this sentence in the below transcript:
We had to lobby and cajole the HSE. I think I wrote six letters in all, seeking to introduce a policy whereby the wearing of face masks would be mandatory and they would be provided for all healthcare workers. We had a situation where one of our members was sent off duty because she attended duty with a face mask. She was advised by her management that it was against HSE policy and she was actually sent home. That became an industrial relations matter which we then resolved. On 22 April the HSE's policy for the mandatory wearing of face masks by all healthcare workers was introduced. We saw a dramatic drop in the number of infections of healthcare workers from that date onwards... We have also learnt that asymptomatic presentation, in other words, people with no symptoms, can still be infectious. Therefore, waiting for somebody to develop a temperature before he or she started wearing PPE was a mistake.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/special_committee_on_covid-19_response/2020-06-23/3/

Seanergy

Yes: valved

Seanergy wrote: »

Measc.ie FFP2 and surgical along with some face coverings were tested by Mater surgery this week. No results yet, not expecting any surprises, will be good to have data though and share data from an Irish source.

Masks4allIreland face coverings tested v well by the way

political analyst

odyssey06 wrote: »

It's from testimony of the leader of the nurses’ union to the Oireachtas Committee:

https://extra.ie/2020/06/24/news/irish-news/inmo-government-frontline-workers

Search for this sentence in the below transcript:
We had to lobby and cajole the HSE. I think I wrote six letters in all, seeking to introduce a policy whereby the wearing of face masks would be mandatory and they would be provided for all healthcare workers. We had a situation where one of our members was sent off duty because she attended duty with a face mask. She was advised by her management that it was against HSE policy and she was actually sent home. That became an industrial relations matter which we then resolved. On 22 April the HSE's policy for the mandatory wearing of face masks by all healthcare workers was introduced. We saw a dramatic drop in the number of infections of healthcare workers from that date onwards... We have also learnt that asymptomatic presentation, in other words, people with no symptoms, can still be infectious. Therefore, waiting for somebody to develop a temperature before he or she started wearing PPE was a mistake.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/special_committee_on_covid-19_response/2020-06-23/3/

I meant: On what grounds did the HSE have the policy under which that nurse was sent home?

SixtaWalthers

I have mask but I only used them once when I visited my cosmologist last time. It is tough to keep your mask up.

RoYoBo

Yes: valved

SixtaWalthers wrote: »

I have mask but I only used them once when I visited my cosmologist last time. It is tough to keep your mask up.

Is this a typo? Just wondering how the origins and evolution of the universe relate to the wearing of masks?

wilkie2006

Yes: to protect myself and others

GT89 wrote: »

Simple continue to wear your mask and ignore what others are saying if you don't agree with what they are saying. I don't have a problem with other people choosing to wear masks I just don't want to wear myself. We should be allowed make choices.

I wear a mask to protect you.
You wear a mask to protect me.

Your decision to not wear a mask affects my health and safety, not yours.

wilkie2006

Yes: to protect myself and others

GT89 wrote: »

Or simply not wear a mask and go to shop no one has the balls to say anything

Genuinely asking, if someone said something to you, what would you do?

is_that_so

No: other

wilkie2006 wrote: »

I wear a mask to protect you.
You wear a mask to protect me.

Your decision to not wear a mask affects my health and safety, not yours.

People largely wear masks because they are told to do so not because of some naff psychobabble, as evidenced by the difference in response once the mask wearing went from the advisable to the mandatory. He's no great danger to you without that 15 mins contact, proximity, lack of hygiene, having the virus, being contagious and actually having enough of a viral load to infect you.

joeguevara

wilkie2006 wrote: »

I wear a mask to protect you.
You wear a mask to protect me.

Your decision to not wear a mask affects my health and safety, not yours.

You are correct that a mask will help others as it will reduce the chance of transmission. But a mask is also beneficial to the wearer too as it reduces the risk of virus particles entering the mouth. Where virus particles do breach the mask, scientific evidence says that due to the reduced amount of particles that enter the body the more chance of your immune system to eliminate them or if infected, due to the reduced amount a more mild infection.

However, after reading ever post on the first page of google ‘does a mask protect the wearer from Covid’ the only thing that is consistent is that every expert differs on the amount of protection it offers the wearer. Firstly, every scenario is different as is every mask. So there is no definitive answer. However, boy standard cloth mask will offer wearer protection. It appears that more reliance is being given to real life evidence rather than scientific experiments as most of these experiments are from coughs less than 6-12 inches away from Petri dish.

It comes up over and over again asking why the advice has changed from early March. As above, every scenario is different. Covid 19 has different virus particles and different size of droplets than other viruses. Because it is a new virus, studies were relying on existing influenza and swine flu particles. With Covid 19 it became apparent much later that virus particles were transmitted through droplets and aerosol. Covid 19 droplets are a different size to other influenza viruses. For all others, because of the larger size of droplets, aerosol transmission was much less likely and that is why masks were seen as less important. For most other viruses hand washing and disinfecting surfaces were the best way to combat it. With Covid it is different. Most new scientific evidence suggests that transmission through fomites (objects) while possible is remote. While appropriate hand washing is still seen as essential and appropriate, evidence suggests that it only reduces transmission by 16%. Most studies I have read concluded that the chance of infection while wearing a mask is circa 3%.

That is why it is so dangerous to rely on old scientific studies as conclusions were based on a different virus. Also, people who refuse to wear a mask and are relying on disinfectant of surfaces and constant hand sanitising are doing little to prevent transmission. Also people who are basing their behaviour on other influenzas are misguided.

I wish there was consistency with all scientific studies and everything was clear, but the baseline is masks reduce transmission for others as well as the wearer. Also, just because you do one thing doesn’t mean you can forget everything else. It is also clear that visors that aren’t flush to the face and have gaps to allow aerosol transmission provide much reduced protection.

joeguevara

is_that_so wrote: »

People largely wear masks because they are told to do so not because of some naff psychobabble, as evidenced by the difference in response once the mask wearing went from the advisable to the mandatory. He's no great danger to you without that 15 mins contact, proximity, lack of hygiene, having the virus, being contagious and actually having enough of a viral load to infect you.

Masks being mandatory definitely is the driving force for people wearing them. Prior to it becoming mandatory I reckon my local supermarket was about 50-60% compliance (depending on the time) to now nearly 100%. Smaller corner shops are definitely a lower compliance rate.

The new evidence about size of droplets and aerosol transmission hasn’t been widely reported and people’s behaviour is based on outdated information. Because the droplets are smaller they travel further. Also a cough or sneeze has a wider puff and plume transmission which wouldn’t be normal in other viruses. Because of the smaller particle size it stays in the air longer and isn’t as widespread on objects.

However you are completely correct about if a person isn’t infected, they can’t infect someone else. Hygiene is still important but the disinfecting groceries mightn’t be as important. Mask wearing is now the most important and effective mitigant. With regards to peoples concerns about touching with hands, if hand sanitising is done, it is not as big a risk as some suggest.

Graham

is_that_so wrote: »

People largely wear masks because they are told to do so

Whatever works.

is_that_so

No: other

joeguevara wrote: »

Masks being mandatory definitely is the driving force for people wearing them. Prior to it becoming mandatory I reckon my local supermarket was about 50-60% compliance (depending on the time) to now nearly 100%. Smaller corner shops are definitely a lower compliance rate.

The new evidence about size of droplets and aerosol transmission hasn’t been widely reported and people’s behaviour is based on outdated information. Because the droplets are smaller they travel further. Also a cough or sneeze has a wider puff and plume transmission which wouldn’t be normal in other viruses. Because of the smaller particle size it stays in the air longer and isn’t as widespread on objects.

However you are completely correct about if a person isn’t infected, they can’t infect someone else. Hygiene is still important but the disinfecting groceries mightn’t be as important. Mask wearing is now the most important and effective mitigant. With regards to peoples concerns about touching with hands, if hand sanitising is done, it is not as big a risk as some suggest.

Not really. Not being close to people is and always has been the best mitigation. Masks do give people a false sense of security without this and the rest of the measures.

is_that_so

No: other

Graham wrote: »

Whatever works.

This does every time. The other is just unconvincing, well-meaning nonsense! Not aware of any other country that didn't just go straight to "wear a mask now".

odyssey06

is_that_so wrote: »

Not really. Not being close to people is and always has been the best mitigation. Masks do give people a false sense of security without that and the rest of the measures.

You also would need to avoid being close to where people have been.. if their droplets havent dispersed.

Masks mitigate that and contain the larger droplets - which can travel further than 2m and take longer to disperse.
Masks mean the air should only have short range more essily dispersed virus particles.

is_that_so

No: other

odyssey06 wrote: »

You also would need to avoid being close to where people have been.. if their droplets havent dispersed.

Masks mitigate that and contain the larger droplets - which can travel further than 2m and take longer to disperse.
Masks mean the air should only have short range more essily dispersed virus particles.

As always, a whole plethora of conditions to satisfy first! There's actually something quite refreshing about "wear a mask or we'll fine you", in this context. No ifs or buts just a rule!

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Left a job because of the lack of face masks. Starting another with face masks. Am I allowed to say something if people aren't wearing their masks properly? My role isn't as a mask police officer.

joeguevara

is_that_so wrote: »

Not really. Not being close to people is and always has been the best mitigation. Masks do give people a false sense of security without this and the rest of the measures.

As I said in my post nothing is a substitute for another mitigation and for most effectiveness all 3(mask, wash hands and social distancing) should be maintained. However recent evidence shows that mask wearing seems to be more important than social distancing because of aerosol transmission. Also, you don’t have control of others social distancing and might inadvertently come into contact with you. Also if maintaining 1or 2 metres distance as recommended, a cough can emit particles up to 25-30 feet and the puff and plume aerosol is way further than 2metres.

I don’t know why false sense of security is constantly raised, as if it is a reason for not wearing it. Even if you have a heightened sense of security, a mask will restrict particles entering your mouth from aerosol droplets. Having no mask and no heightened sense of security won’t. Actually social distancing might cause a heightened sense of security and if 10 feet away with no mask, and someone coughs in your direction, there is a chance of infection.

Do all 3. Best advice.

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/masks-significantly-reduce-infection-risk-likely-preventing-thousands-of-covid

political analyst

Why did the HSE's previous policy on masks forbid the wearing of masks by nurses and other members of staff at work?

odyssey06 wrote: »

It's from testimony of the leader of the nurses’ union to the Oireachtas Committee:

https://extra.ie/2020/06/24/news/irish-news/inmo-government-frontline-workers

Search for this sentence in the below transcript:
We had to lobby and cajole the HSE. I think I wrote six letters in all, seeking to introduce a policy whereby the wearing of face masks would be mandatory and they would be provided for all healthcare workers. We had a situation where one of our members was sent off duty because she attended duty with a face mask. She was advised by her management that it was against HSE policy and she was actually sent home. That became an industrial relations matter which we then resolved. On 22 April the HSE's policy for the mandatory wearing of face masks by all healthcare workers was introduced. We saw a dramatic drop in the number of infections of healthcare workers from that date onwards... We have also learnt that asymptomatic presentation, in other words, people with no symptoms, can still be infectious. Therefore, waiting for somebody to develop a temperature before he or she started wearing PPE was a mistake.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/special_committee_on_covid-19_response/2020-06-23/3/

is_that_so

No: other

joeguevara wrote: »

As I said in my post nothing is a substitute for another mitigation and for most effectiveness all 3(mask, wash hands and social distancing) should be maintained. However recent evidence shows that mask wearing seems to be more important than social distancing because of aerosol transmission. Also, you don’t have control of others social distancing and might inadvertently come into contact with you. Also if maintaining 1or 2 metres distance as recommended, a cough can emit particles up to 25-30 feet and the puff and plume aerosol is way further than 2metres.

I don’t know why false sense of security is constantly raised, as if it is a reason for not wearing it. Even if you have a heightened sense of security, a mask will restrict particles entering your mouth from aerosol droplets. Having no mask and no heightened sense of security won’t. Actually social distancing might cause a heightened sense of security and if 10 feet away with no mask, and someone coughs in your direction, there is a chance of infection.

Do all 3. Best advice.

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/masks-significantly-reduce-infection-risk-likely-preventing-thousands-of-covid

Fair enough. I'm more of a fan of a definitive rule, much as I dislike it as it leaves far less room for squirming, zealotry or just justifying behaviour. We wear them or get fined is uncomplicated.

BTW I really don't know why people keep posting links to things that are "likely" - that's just a level of probability and quite "likely" confirmation bias. The battleground over masks to me is like a squabble over the corner piece of a jigsaw, with absolutely no attention paid to the rest of the empty COVID canvas around them.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Left a job because of the lack of face masks. Starting another with face masks. Am I allowed to say something if people aren't wearing their masks properly? My role isn't as a mask police officer.

You say nothing to another person about how they wear a mask. If you have a concern have a chat with their manager/supervisor and let then decide if a general instruction on the DO's and DON'Ts of mask wearing is required.

arccosh

is_that_so wrote: »

This does every time. The other is just unconvincing, well-meaning nonsense! Not aware of any other country that didn't just go straight to "wear a mask now".

out of interest, how would you approach it?


Give people an option and they'll take the path of least resistance...


unless you make it mandatory, with some sort of action with consequence, it's the only way to induce maximum uptake...


-you can't sway people with facts
-people won't do it if they have the option not to


unfortunately this approach fuels the ever perpetuating ego stroking of the self diagnosed rebels, but in fairness, in a pandemic where we can't 100% say what effect a virus has on humans long term and has the small issue of killing a certain demographic of the population, I think there is a bit of just cause for making masks mandatory, especially as an alternative to a lockdown....


lockdown in theory should have eradicated the virus, but humans being humans, not everyone stuck to strict lockdown requirements, so we still have it here, so the next step it mitigation

is_that_so

No: other

arccosh wrote: »

out of interest, how would you approach it?


Give people an option and they'll take the path of least resistance...


unless you make it mandatory, with some sort of action with consequence, it's the only way to induce maximum uptake...


-you can't sway people with facts
-people won't do it if they have the option not to


unfortunately this approach fuels the ever perpetuating ego stroking of the self diagnosed rebels, but in fairness, in a pandemic where we can't 100% say what effect a virus has on humans long term and has the small issue of killing a certain demographic of the population, I think there is a bit of just cause for making masks mandatory, especially as an alternative to a lockdown....


lockdown in theory should have eradicated the virus, but humans being humans, not everyone stuck to strict lockdown requirements, so we still have it here, so the next step it mitigation

Wear a mask - says the government, but masks are moot if people are not out and about. Their use is really to facilitate the large-scale movement of people. It's never been everybody anyway - it's not a credible strategy. Most people, doing most things most of the time as the CMO was wont to say. Restricions were never to eliminate it - the aim was always to hit a low manageable level of the disease.

Everybodyjay

Yes: homemade

all about the mane wrote: »

I have access to masks but wouldn’t wear them unless I am up close with a symptomatic covid19 person.

Why would you be upclose talking to someone with covid19

Away With The Fairies

Yes: valved

Everybodyjay wrote: »

Why would you be upclose talking to someone with covid19

Why did you quote something from march? I'm sure alot of people's views has changed since then.

Pretty sure I said I won't be wearing masks unless I'm sick at the beginning of this. Well that changed on my part.

Tork

Yes: to protect others

Far more people wearing masks badly now. Under the nose is the most common one, followed by masks worn very loosely and barely covering the lower part of the face.

Jim_Hodge

Yes: homemade

Tork wrote: »

Far more people wearing masks badly now. Under the nose is the most common one, followed by masks worn very loosely and barely covering the lower part of the face.

We need a major advertising campaign calling out improper wearing and handling of masks. It can't be that hard to put together.