To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

AlekSmart

Seanergy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ryanlcooper/status/1352297995572809728

Judging by yesterdays inauguration,it's time to buy shares in the Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company....and lot's of 'em

Seanergy

AlekSmart wrote: »

Judging by yesterdays inauguration,it's time to buy shares in the Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company....and lot's of 'em

Go spam somewhere else with your off thread diarrhoea.

saneman

Seanergy wrote: »

Go spam somewhere else with your off thread diarrhoea.

A little unfair, they was referring to 3M (Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company) and Biden introducing a requirement for mask use on federal property, public transport & planes.

Seanergy

saneman wrote: »

A little unfair, they was referring to 3M (Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company) and Biden introducing a requirement for mask use on federal property, public transport & planes.

Absolutely not.

BTW zero reference was made to 3M in orginal post so my comment stands.

The world is in a delicate place with regard N95's and this pandemic, one false move by Biden and a lot of health care workers in developing countries will be without supply.

It would be ethically unfair of Biden to send a weekly supply of N95's to each american

Seanergy

As new mask mandates get proposed and enacted in Europe they will be added into a timeline on this website.

https://its-airborne.org/masks-2021#event-higher-spec-mask-mandates-in-2021

paw patrol

i see France now says that cloth masks are inadequate.

something i said previously (months ago) on this thread and was attacked by the boards posse with "bUt ThE sCiEnCe" they cried :pac:

Irish Stones

Seanergy wrote: »

As new mask mandates get proposed and enacted in Europe they will be added into a timeline on this website.

https://its-airborne.org/masks-2021#event-higher-spec-mask-mandates-in-2021

I wonder why they stuck with these surgical masks in the first place when they are known for rather poor protection.
At the very beginning of the emergency, before the pandemic was called, at work we were given FFP2 and KN95 masks to wear, even out of workplace.
One morning I was at my vet's office and they were wearing surgical masks, the like they use for their job, and they said that my FFP2 was much better than theirs.
So, why in the last 12 months they preferred to invest and produce surgical masks rather than upgrading the production lines to something better?


I also remember when at the very beginning of the pandemic, we were advised against the use of masks, because, they said, the masks would give us a false sense of safety. Distancing and hand hygiene was the way to go, they said.

odyssey06

Irish Stones wrote: »

I wonder why they stuck with these surgical masks in the first place when they are known for rather poor protection.
At the very beginning of the emergency, before the pandemic was called, at work we were given FFP2 and KN95 masks to wear, even out of workplace.
One morning I was at my vet's office and they were wearing surgical masks, the like they use for their job, and they said that my FFP2 was much better than theirs.
So, why in the last 12 months they preferred to invest and produce surgical masks rather than upgrading the production lines to something better?
I also remember when at the very beginning of the pandemic, we were advised against the use of masks, because, they said, the masks would give us a false sense of safety. Distancing and hand hygiene was the way to go, they said.

Direct protection of the wearer is only half the equation, it is more important for people in medical and care or other high risk settings who are in theory uninfected dealing with people who are infected. At the beginning of the pandemic the focus was on direct protection (plus we didn't have enough of the high grade masks).

For the general population, as barriers, surgical masks do the job.
But they are not going to effectively protect you in an environment where you are wearing one and no one else and you are in close contact (though they may reduce viral load).

Of course you can bump up your protection with an FFP2.

Dhenalau

paw patrol wrote: »

i see France now says that cloth masks are inadequate.

something i said previously (months ago) on this thread and was attacked by the boards posse with "bUt ThE sCiEnCe" they cried :pac:

They do not say that cloth masks are inadequate, it is recommended to use UNS1 (AFNOR) cloth masks (90% filtration) because of the new COVID variants.

Decathlon have them for example (Adult Washable Covid-19 Barrier Mask Twin-Pack - Black)

paw patrol

Dhenalau wrote: »

They do not say that cloth masks are inadequate, it is recommended to use UNS1 (AFNOR) cloth masks (90% filtration) because of the new COVID variants.

Decathlon have them for example (Adult Washable Covid-19 Barrier Mask Twin-Pack - Black)

Why would they say to wear a specific one and not a cloth one unless they were inadequate. The masks mandate has been a lie since day 1. Masks of a certain standard do offer protection. The ****ty ones worn by most do not.

an interesting comment about the variant, is it a smaller type of virus that sneaks in through the holes better? what a rogue :pac:

xhomelezz

paw patrol wrote: »

Why would they say to wear a specific one and not a cloth one unless they were inadequate. The masks mandate has been a lie since day 1. Masks of a certain standard do offer protection. The ****ty ones worn by most do not.

an interesting comment about the variant, is it a smaller type of virus that sneaks in through the holes better? what a rogue :pac:

There's plenty of holes in your post, no mask would save you I'm afraid.

Dhenalau

None one says the new COVID variant re smaller, that would be a lie.
They are more contagious/infectious.

odyssey06

Dhenalau wrote: »

None one says the new COVID variant re smaller, that would be a lie.
They are more contagious/infectious.

What I read was the mutations that allow it to bind more easily to the ACE receptor, which is the protein on human lung cells that allows virus attachment to create infection.

paw patrol

xhomelezz wrote: »

There's plenty of holes in your post, no mask would save you I'm afraid.

That made me laugh :pac:

Graham

paw patrol wrote: »

Why would they say to wear a specific one and not a cloth one unless they were inadequate. The masks mandate has been a lie since day 1.

It's not a particularly confusing concept:

All masks offer some protection.

Some masks give better protection than others.

ShineOn7

Looking for site links to FFP2 masks with adjustable straps

Or have people found an easy DIY fix to make them fit better?

It took a pandemic to make me realize my head might be smaller than the average

Sconsey

paw patrol wrote: »

Why would they say to wear a specific one and not a cloth one unless they were inadequate. The masks mandate has been a lie since day 1. Masks of a certain standard do offer protection. The ****ty ones worn by most do not.

an interesting comment about the variant, is it a smaller type of virus that sneaks in through the holes better? what a rogue :pac:

Just another squeaky "mAsKs ArE a LiE bRo" post.

railer201

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Looking for site links to FFP2 masks with adjustable straps

Or have people found an easy DIY fix to make them fit better?

It took a pandemic to make me realize my head might be smaller than the average

Try shortening the straps first, pinch then stitch - if this doesn't work try using shoelace cord instead of elastic straps. Cut suitable lengths and stitch to corners, then tie to get the right fit around ears.

AlekSmart

Seanergy wrote: »

Absolutely not.

BTW zero reference was made to 3M in orginal post so my comment stands.

The world is in a delicate place with regard N95's and this pandemic, one false move by Biden and a lot of health care workers in developing countries will be without supply.

It would be ethically unfair of Biden to send a weekly supply of N95's to each american

Hi

Sorry for the misunderstanding...I (mistakenly ?) assumed you knew that the Minesota Mining & Manufacturing Company is known as 3M.

I was struck by the very obvious numbers of 3M logo'd masks on strategic display,which in the most Consumer focused country in the World,counts for a lot.

Product placement is,of itself,big business and 3M really hit paydirt here.

Seanergy

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Looking for site links to FFP2 masks with adjustable straps

Or have people found an easy DIY fix to make them fit better?

It took a pandemic to make me realize my head might be smaller than the average

It took a pandemic for me to admt to myself my nose was bigger than most.


Quick DIY is to use strap savers/reducers off a bra.

Seanergy

AlekSmart wrote: »

Hi

Sorry for the misunderstanding...I (mistakenly ?) assumed you knew that the Minesota Mining & Manufacturing Company is known as 3M.

I was struck by the very obvious numbers of 3M logo'd masks on strategic display,which in the most Consumer focused country in the World,counts for a lot.

Product placement is,of itself,big business and 3M really hit paydirt here.

Thanks

Yes you did and no I didn't know that about the Minesota Mining & Manufacturing Company but was aware of how it featured for both candidates in the run up, now I do, sorry my end also.

I didn't catch a 3M logo once and if I had maybe I might have copped it but then again I was half glancing whilst doing other work.

Tender hooks on mask supplies worldwide with 3 European countries upgrading into HCW grade terriorty and Biden signing in mask mandate's.



Biden has been rocking a non medical grade mask for a while now and judging by his close relationship with the CDC and repaired relationship with the WHO will not be recommending 95/F2 to any and all Americans, will find out shortly no doubt.

paw patrol

Graham wrote: »

It's not a particularly confusing concept:

All masks offer some protection.

I don't agree in the sense that "some" is a very subjective term.

It's minimal if anything and that is based on correct use and hygiene (not rewearing it) . Both of which don't happen.

Graham wrote: »

Some masks give better protection than others.

Now there is something we agree on:)

I would agree that masks of a standard like PPF3 will offer protection.
In fact I have a batch bought when I thought this was the plague and the dead bodies on a Chinese street was gonna be our reality.

lucalux

Seanergy wrote: »

Biden has been rocking a non medical grade mask for a while now and judging by his close relationship with the CDC and repaired relationship with the WHO will not be recommending 95/F2 to any and all Americans, will find out shortly no doubt.

I saw him saying a few months ago, (after the election) that he had been, and still was, wearing a medical grade mask underneath the cloth mask. Seems to be the case for a lot of the politicians and reporters too as far as I've seen over the past few months

Graham

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't agree in the sense that "some" is a very subjective term.

It's minimal if anything and that is based on correct use and hygiene (not rewearing it) . Both of which don't happen.

Most of the people I see are wearing masks correctly and rewearing masks doesn't reduce the masks ability to filter the droplets you breath out.

You of course will continue to pretend otherwise for some odd reason.

Seanergy

lucalux wrote: »

I saw him saying a few months ago, (after the election) that he had been, and still was, wearing a medical grade mask underneath the cloth mask. Seems to be the case for a lot of the politicians and reporters too as far as I've seen over the past few months

Maybe, but without you linking to a solid reference, I will not swallow your word, based on all my observations of Biden with mask on. None of us are seeing Biden double masking.



Double masking with a 95 under a non medical is a narrative gaining traction in the USA and I hope it it nipped in the butt soon.


What country are you referring to when you are referring to you observing lots of politicians and reporters double masking?

Away With The Fairies

The lady on last night's late late show talking about her husband who recently caught covid and died last week from it, age 50. He caught it around Christmas and didn't feel right and wore a mask around the house anyways. Think she said they had parents over and she didn't mention herself or the parents catching it. Surely that's proof that masks work?

odyssey06

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

The lady on last night's late late show talking about her husband who recently caught covid and died last week from it, age 50. He caught it around Christmas and didn't feel right and wore a mask around the house anyways. Think she said they had parents over and she didn't mention herself or the parents catching it. Surely that's proof that masks work?

There are reports on other boards threads from people who tested positive of one spouse testing positive and not the other... tested at same time, weren't taking precautions like the above. Could've been the mask - could've been a scenario like the above.

Away With The Fairies

odyssey06 wrote: »

There are reports on other boards threads from people who tested positive of one spouse testing positive and not the other... tested at same time, weren't taking precautions like the above. Could've been the mask - could've been a scenario like the above.

That is true. And couples sharing a bed and one positive and one negative. There's no way they couldn't not get it if one person has it. Or the wife could have been asymptomatic and passed it on.

JJayoo

From what I have seen it seems to be a form of attention seeking to not wear a mask, much like when a child will misbehave to get attention from a parent. Don't wear a mask and you will be acknowledged.

Or maybe their breathe smells like sh1t

Seanergy

Danger danger

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1353186978519539712

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/europe-coronavirus-masks-regulations/2021/01/20/23463c08-5a74-11eb-a849-6f9423a75ffd_story.html