Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.
Options
Comments
-
I commented on that well known Finnish video. It suggests something different. But ultimately, what exactly is the focus for on a non-air conditioned room?
What exactly do you think the video suggests?
The modelling carried out by the Finnish team was to give a visual representation of how droplets may travel after a person coughs and covers a 6 min period approx. Based on the constraints they chose, and over that timespan, some droplets fall to the floor and some dispersed into the air. The video itself does not show what happens after 6mins and does not suggest that all droplets fall to the ground. In any case, as time progresses, much like weather forecasting, it becomes more difficult to accurately model that behaviour.
https://www.aalto.fi/en/news/researchers-modelling-the-spread-of-the-coronavirus-emphasise-the-importance-of-avoiding-busy
"The researchers of the consortium modelled the airborne movement of aerosol particles smaller than 20 micrometres. For a dry cough, which is a typical symptom of the current coronavirus, the particle size is typically less than 15 micrometres. Extremely small particles of this size do not sink on the floor, but instead, move along in the air currents or remain floating in the same place."0 -
Can you point me to the study which shows that we can look at a room or space and determine how adequate its ventilation is for the dispersal of droplets?
'Indoor squash court' ? Do many people work or shop regularly in such a space? Totally absurd comparison.
How do you even know how good the air conditioning is, if it's working effectively, if it is recirculating air or not.
You have just invented an 'accepted practice' out of thin air of absolute unkown levels of acceptance or effectiveness. Your accepted practice is no such thing and irrelevent in any case.
Droplets can hang in the air. This we know.
Droplets are reduced by masks. This we know.
Is it probable that larger better ventilated spaces disperse droplets better than other spaces? Yes.
Do we know enough to know what level of ventilation is in different spaces to the extent that we can be confident droplets will disperse? No.
Therefore, in my opinion totally reasonable to mandate mask wearing.
First paragraph, no. Is there one? What’s the accepted end point where the air is now deemed safe after being exchanged?
Second paragraph, going by the view from some in society that one Covid infection and one death is one too many, an indoor squash court is as valid a reference sample as a stuffy office room.
Third paragraph, would a hospital’s air exchange system be deemed best practice? If so, the people who are allowed deem it such, would they be allowed to deem a supermarket’s air con system suitable for general society?
Fourth paragraph, Yes.
Yes, it’s accepted now, yet ‘the experts’ said before masks didn’t help. Those same experts you’re now latching onto them saying they’re safe. Things change, for whatever motive or reason.
Fifth paragraph, your opinion. I’ve yet to hear an accepted, beyond all reasonable argument, why the case numbers came down when people weren’t wearing masks as much and have now increased in line with greater mask use. People still went out and met people in May, June, etc. It’s not only because lockdown was perceived to be stricter then. It can’t be.
I read that Mater report and think, who funded it and for what purpose did they undertake the research? ‘Air hangs longer in a walled-in room’ I should’ve been a researcher.0 -
I read that Mater report and think, who funded it and for what purpose did they undertake the research? ‘Air hangs longer in a walled-in room’ I should’ve been a researcher.
People don't believe common sense stuff like exhaled droplets are significantly reduced by wearing a mask.
Tell the same people droplets hand around in an unventilated room and the first thing they're going to come out with is something like....I’ve yet to hear an accepted, beyond all reasonable argument0 -
People don't believe common sense stuff like exhaled droplets are significantly reduced by wearing a mask.
Tell the same people droplets hand around in an unventilated room and the first thing they're going to come out with is something like....
Naughty naughty, Graham. That’s a clear misquote of me.
You reference the stale room bit and then quote me regarding how the mask use does not correlate to the transmission rate.
Was that deliberate by you or a genuine mistake, however extreme?
And by the way, do you know who funded it and why the researchers set out in the first place to discover this information??0 -
We'll see soon enough with COVID. Actual research planned on how it behaves in a variety of environments."The researchers of the consortium modelled the airborne movement of aerosol particles smaller than 20 micrometres. For a dry cough, which is a typical symptom of the current coronavirus, the particle size is typically less than 15 micrometres. Extremely small particles of this size do not sink on the floor, but instead, move along in the air currents or remain floating in the same place."0 -
Advertisement
-
First paragraph, no. Is there one? What’s the accepted end point where the air is now deemed safe after being exchanged?
We don't know what the accepted end point is.
Do you?
So what's your point?Second paragraph, going by the view from some in society that one Covid infection and one death is one too many, an indoor squash court is as valid a reference sample as a stuffy office room.
You are the one who brought a totally absurd reference into the discussion.
An indoor squash court. Like WTAF. You are talking utter nonsense here.Third paragraph, would a hospital’s air exchange system be deemed best practice? If so, the people who are allowed deem it such, would they be allowed to deem a supermarket’s air con system suitable for general society?
There is no 'a supermarket' and this isn't just about supermarkets. How can we possibly know this information for all the various retail outlets in the country?
It is about bookstores, off licences, hairdressers ALL retail.Fourth paragraph, Yes.
Yes, it’s accepted now, yet ‘the experts’ said before masks didn’t help. Those same experts you’re now latching onto them saying they’re safe. Things change, for whatever motive or reason.
I guess the 'experts' should have just locked in their advice based on the limited view they had of this virus and its transmission in spring and not updated it when they had more information. I guess that'd be the expert thing to do would it in your opinion?Fifth paragraph, your opinion. I’ve yet to hear an accepted, beyond all reasonable argument, why the case numbers came down when people weren’t wearing masks as much and have now increased in line with greater mask use. People still went out and met people in May, June, etc. It’s not only because lockdown was perceived to be stricter then. It can’t be.
I don't even know what this sentence means. Lockdown was perceived to be stricter than what? It can't be, simple objection = why???I read that Mater report and think, who funded it and for what purpose did they undertake the research? ‘Air hangs longer in a walled-in room’ I should’ve been a researcher.
Air hangs longer in a walled-in room?
What on earth are you on about?
That's not what the purpose of the report was to show, was it?"To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0 -
We don't know what the accepted end point is.
Do you?
So what's your point?
You are the one who brought a totally absurd reference into the discussion.
An indoor squash court. Like WTAF. You are talking utter nonsense here.
There is no 'a supermarket' and this isn't just about supermarkets. How can we possibly know this information for all the various retail outlets in the country?
It is about bookstores, off licences, hairdressers ALL retail.
I guess the 'experts' should have just locked in their advice based on the limited view they had of this virus and its transmission in spring and not updated it when they had more information. I guess that'd be the expert thing to do would it in your opinion?
I don't even know what this sentence means. Lockdown was perceived to be stricter than what? It can't be, simple objection = why???
Air hangs longer in a walled-in room?
What on earth are you on about?
That's not what the purpose of the report was to show, was it?
Jaysus, there’s a lot here.
By end point I mean when is the air safe enough to breath without contracting Covid.
Indoor squash court, largely, is as sealed as this ‘room’ referenced in the Mater study. You now have 2 people sweating and panting. Remember the ‘suggestion’ early on that was given airtime that Covid can be contracted through sweat?!
I don’t see your point regarding the next paragraph.
I like your comment about the experts. Of course I agree advice should change as new science based info comes to light. I see the CDC have info waiting in the wings to be changed shortly. What’s the delay? They’re double checking their evidence?! Doubt it.
But even when NPHET and Fauci/CDC were saying in April no need for masks, we had zealous people here wearing them anyway, calling for their widespread use. As in, ignoring the experts’ advice. Yet now they hang on the fact the experts ‘agree’ with them. Confirmation bias.
I still don’t get why the researchers spent time, money and effort finding out fine mist droplets hang in the air longer than bigger droplets. And even more so, why did RTÉ bother reporting it.
Lockdown was stricter in May than now or August is what I mean. As in, less things were open for mass gatherings then than now. Is that not the case? And mask usage was lower in May? But people still met up, yes? Yet cases dropped quickly and significantly. But then, with greater uptake of usage, cases rose. What’s your point? ‘Masks work because the experts say so or because the figures say so’?
Were they lying when they said ‘masks on the public could increase rates due to greater face touching’?
Lastly, yes, when I said ‘Air hangs.....’ I meant the droplets in the study. My fault. A slip. Obviously I didn’t think if you stuck your head into said room after an hour, there’d be a vacuum at the top of the room. Did you think I meant that?0 -
Lockdown was stricter in May than now or August is what I mean. As in, less things were open for mass gatherings then than now. Is that not the case? And mask usage was lower in May? But people still met up, yes? Yet cases dropped quickly and significantly. But then, with greater uptake of usage, cases rose.
Cases rose because restrictions were loosened.0 -
By end point I mean when is the air safe enough to breath without contracting Covid.
When is the air safe enough to breathe without contracting Covid?
You are the one raising this point, you seem to know when the air is safe enough to breathe, through some unknown means which you have failed to explain.Indoor squash court, largely, is as sealed as this ‘room’ referenced in the Mater study. You now have 2 people sweating and panting. Remember the ‘suggestion’ early on that was given airtime that Covid can be contracted through sweat?!
I don't know what any of this means or how it is relevant to the current discussion.
Jeez. You mean there was a time when we weren't sure about possible transmission vectors for a new disease? Why does this surprise you?
It's just stirring the pot and deliberate obfuscation.
There is documented evidence of transmission from an outdoors yoga class.
What does any of this have to do with indoor squash courts I don't know.
You don't seem to know either.I like your comment about the experts. Of course I agree advice should change as new science based info comes to light. I see the CDC have info waiting in the wings to be changed shortly. What’s the delay? They’re double checking their evidence?! Doubt it.
This is just innuendo.
You make a big deal about experts updating their advice and then you throw out a kite flying sentence like this.
Explain your doubts in a non-conspiracy theory way or drop this slurry spreading.But even when NPHET and Fauci/CDC were saying in April no need for masks, we had zealous people here wearing them anyway, calling for their widespread use. As in, ignoring the experts’ advice. Yet now they hang on the fact the experts ‘agree’ with them. Confirmation bias.
I don't know what any of this means or how it is relevant in any way.I still don’t get why the researchers spent time, money and effort finding out fine mist droplets hang in the air longer than bigger droplets. And even more so, why did RTÉ bother reporting it.
That's really your problem as far as I can see.
Your objections seem utterly without merit or foundation to me.Lockdown was stricter in May than now or August is what I mean. As in, less things were open for mass gatherings then than now. Is that not the case? And mask usage was lower in May? But people still met up, yes? Yet cases dropped quickly and significantly. But then, with greater uptake of usage, cases rose. What’s your point? ‘Masks work because the experts say so or because the figures say so’?
You accept lockdown was stricter and yet still raise this canard?
People still met up? If the lockdown was stricter I don't know how you can state this. In the same paragraph you are contradicting yourself.
How many people did we have travelling to and from Europe, and then how many people travelling from Dublin to the rest of the country - in spring versus July & August?
Can you find me the quote where we are being told to wear masks as they are more effective than lockdown? I'm stating this as it seems to be the implication of your post but then I'm having to read that into what you are writing.Were they lying when they said ‘masks on the public could increase rates due to greater face touching’?
Why do they have to be lying???
Is it possible they know have a better understanding of the vectors of transmission between respiratory inhaled droplets and fomite?
Also, they were framing the advice from the perspective of an uninfected person trying to avoid infection i.e. masks as PPE.
Now the advice is being framed from the perspective of masks as barriers to reduce the chances of an infected person infecting an uninfected person i.e. masks as barriers.Lastly, yes, when I said ‘Air hangs.....’ I meant the droplets in the study. My fault. A slip. Obviously I didn’t think if you stuck your head into said room after an hour, there’d be a vacuum at the top of the room. Did you think I meant that?
I have no idea what you meant and still don't."To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0 -
Cases rose because restrictions were loosened.
And masks did nothing to stop the rise or the rise would’ve been even greater without them?! Which?
How many of the positive cases since Aug 1, when the current ‘critical’ period we’re in now started, are accounted for by people actively contagious?
I’ll give you a hint; NPHET don’t release that relevant info. But you don’t find that unusual or worthy of making the RTE news.0 -
Advertisement
-
When is the air safe enough to breathe without contracting Covid?
You are the one raising this point, you seem to know when the air is safe enough to breathe, through some unknown means which you have failed to explain.
I don't know what any of this means or how it is relevant to the current discussion.
Jeez. You mean there was a time when we weren't sure about possible transmission vectors for a new disease? Why does this surprise you?
It's just stirring the pot and deliberate obfuscation.
There is documented evidence of transmission from an outdoors yoga class.
What does any of this have to do with indoor squash courts I don't know.
You don't seem to know either.
This is just innuendo.
You make a big deal about experts updating their advice and then you throw out a kite flying sentence like this.
Explain your doubts in a non-conspiracy theory way or drop this slurry spreading.
I don't know what any of this means or how it is relevant in any way.
That's really your problem as far as I can see.
Your objections seem utterly without merit or foundation to me.
You accept lockdown was stricter and yet still raise this canard?
People still met up? If the lockdown was stricter I don't know how you can state this. In the same paragraph you are contradicting yourself.
How many people did we have travelling to and from Europe, and then how many people travelling from Dublin to the rest of the country - in spring versus July & August?
Can you find me the quote where we are being told to wear masks as they are more effective than lockdown? I'm stating this as it seems to be the implication of your post but then I'm having to read that into what you are writing.
Why do they have to be lying???
Is it possible they know have a better understanding of the vectors of transmission between respiratory inhaled droplets and fomite?
Also, they were framing the advice from the perspective of an uninfected person trying to avoid infection i.e. masks as PPE.
Now the advice is being framed from the perspective of masks as barriers to reduce the chances of an infected person infecting an uninfected person i.e. masks as barriers.
I have no idea what you meant and still don't.
This is ridiculous and will lose the thread the interest there is.
This long to-and-fro came about from the Mater study.
Suffice to say, who funded it and why? And why did RTE show it versus making a piece asking why case numbers/ICU/Deaths are only given matter of factly by NPHEF instead of highlighting how it’s that many of the positive cases are of expired contagion due to the limits of their PCR test, how someone who is admitted to ICU for a non Covid reason but who also has tested positive (using that limited PCR test) is then added to the nightly news Covid ICU figure and so don’t worry folks and that many of the deaths we’ve heard of late aren’t from the day of announcement or close to it but from months back.
That would be doing more of a broadcast service than trying to sex up a study that fine mist hangs in the air longer than larger droplets.
And don’t imply I’m a conspiracy theorist because I’ve a different view to you. You do yourself a disservice.0 -
And don’t imply I’m a conspiracy theorist because I’ve a different view to you. You do yourself a disservice.
I didn't imply that you're a conspiracy theorist because you have a different view to me, I raised it because you have this view:
"I see the CDC have info waiting in the wings to be changed shortly. What’s the delay? They’re double checking their evidence?! Doubt it."
And I stated:
"Explain your doubts in a non-conspiracy theory way or drop this slurry spreading."
As you have been unable to explain your doubts, I think the conclusion about them is obvious.
Come back to us when you have an actual point to make instead of these 'hints' and 'doubts' and other innuendo."To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0 -
Seen a shop worker today taking their visor off and fanning themselves with it. Great way to spread the virus around.
Counted four more shop workers in the same shop not wearing masks properly either. One with mask under the nose, another behind their screen not serving a customer and the mask hanging off one ear. Two more behind the one counter and close to each other with face mask on the chin and another hanging off the ear giving themselves a break from mask wearing while also serving a customer.
Is there such a thing as a face mask training course. Alot of people needs to do such a course.0 -
I didn't imply that you're a conspiracy theorist because you have a different view to me, I raised it because you have this view:
"I see the CDC have info waiting in the wings to be changed shortly. What’s the delay? They’re double checking their evidence?! Doubt it."
And I stated:
"Explain your doubts in a non-conspiracy theory way or drop this slurry spreading."
As you have been unable to explain your doubts, I think the conclusion about them is obvious.
Come back to us when you have an actual point to make instead of these 'hints' and 'doubts' and other innuendo.
What part of the Mater study is newsworthy, odyssey06? This is where this to-and-fro came from.
What great societal benefit did RTÉ viewers get from watching the report on the study? Why don’t they investigate the construct of the Case/Hospitalisation/ICU/Death figures? Don’t tell us you’re not the editor.
Regarding conspiracy theories; the CDC have info they want to change over to as their new advice. They published it. Then retracted it. They’re not double-checking the evidence. The explanation given for the confusion and how someone jumped the gun in pressing send is unbelievable to anyone who doesn’t need to hang on confirmation bias reports.
I ask you; who funded the Mater study and for what purpose? Why do NPHET release the figures in the manner they do and not explain the honest significance of each category?0 -
What part of the Mater study is newsworthy, odyssey06? This is where this to-and-fro came from.
What great societal benefit did RTÉ viewers get from watching the report on the study? Why don’t they investigate the construct of the Case/Hospitalisation/ICU/Death figures? Don’t tell us you’re not the editor.
Regarding conspiracy theories; the CDC have info they want to change over to as their new advice. They published it. Then retracted it. They’re not double-checking the evidence. The explanation given for the confusion and how someone jumped the gun in pressing send is unbelievable to anyone who doesn’t need to hang on confirmation bias reports.
I ask you; who funded the Mater study and for what purpose? Why do NPHET release the figures in the manner they do and not explain the honest significance of each category?
'Great societal benefit'? Have you watched much non-coronavirus RTE news?
Is that the standard for what gets included in an RTE report?
Apparently in your universe it does.
Do you subject evey single item on RTE to this level of great societal benefit scrutiny?
What does any of this have to do with this thread?
You're not challenging the findings, just that it made it onto RTE and 'who funded it'?
If you have information that comprises the validity of the study, please share it otherwise it's just conspiracy theory dog whistling.
CDC \ unbelievable \ confirmation bias reports = What does any of that mean???
Still you won't explain yourself, just more conspiracy theory dog whistling."To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0 -
Do you mean this bit; ‘ The Mater research also shows that the aerosols and droplets from the nose and mouth can remain suspended in the air - in an inside room with no ventilation - for up to an hour before falling to the ground’?
Yes I meant that bit, thank you.
It might not be field leading work by any stretch of the imagination but it is valued, needed and valid as is any and all Irish lead research. Operating a delayed strategy inline with WHO and ECDC advice during a pandemic is a cowardly and dangerous approach IMHO and not an option we should be looking to repeat.
BTW the masks that K Nolan used in this research were all Irish produced, FFP2's and surgical masks from measc.ie and the face covering were from a #masks4allIreland template which produced 65,000+ by JULY.
Why not drop K Nolan a mail with some of your questions? kevin.nolan@ucd.ie
The devout pro maskers in thread here in April never ignored expert advice regarding masks. Read back in the thread, the 'zealous' people were educating and encoruaging people to make and wear their own face coverings and not tap essential mask supplies.But even when NPHET and Fauci/CDC were saying in April no need for masks, we had zealous people here wearing them anyway, calling for their widespread use. As in, ignoring the experts’ advice.0 -
Is one of the other reasons we are wearing masks now to prevent the spread of other cold, flus, etc that often spread rapidly at this time of the year and often take up hospital beds, etc?0
-
freshpopcorn wrote: »Is one of the other reasons we are wearing masks now to prevent the spread of other cold, flus, etc that often spread rapidly at this time of the year and often take up hospital beds, etc?
Not officially, and I think any effect will be very limited as long as the schools are open.
We've seen an explosion of cold-type viruses since kids went back to school.
Previous research suggests they are big drivers of transmission of flus whereas for coronavirus there are indications that isn't the case."To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0 -
Away With The Fairies wrote: »Seen a shop worker today taking their visor off and fanning themselves with it. Great way to spread the virus around.
Counted four more shop workers in the same shop not wearing masks properly either. One with mask under the nose, another behind their screen not serving a customer and the mask hanging off one ear. Two more behind the one counter and close to each other with face mask on the chin and another hanging off the ear giving themselves a break from mask wearing while also serving a customer.
Is there such a thing as a face mask training course. Alot of people needs to do such a course.
Fanning oneself with a visor is wrong in light of reports of covid-19 possibly re-aersolising from droplet form during doffing procedures by HCW's.
Change of tact needed asap from NPHET GOV HSE regarding mask approach. Mandating and talking at the public is no replacement for education and talking with the public.0 -
Regarding the visors if I wear one I feel like my head is an extra foot long and I think I'm going to knock things off the shelves in shops!0
-
Advertisement
-
'Great societal benefit'? Have you watched much non-coronavirus RTE news?
Is that the standard for what gets included in an RTE report?
Apparently in your universe it does.
Do you subject evey single item on RTE to this level of great societal benefit scrutiny?
What does any of this have to do with this thread?
You're not challenging the findings, just that it made it onto RTE and 'who funded it'?
If you have information that comprises the validity of the study, please share it otherwise it's just conspiracy theory dog whistling.
CDC \ unbelievable \ confirmation bias reports = What does any of that mean???
Still you won't explain yourself, just more conspiracy theory dog whistling.
‘Great societal benefit’ isn’t actually a measure I use to critique things in front of me. No need to pretend it is. You know it isn’t.
Most RTE news is generic in nature; car crash on some black spot, same old political shenanigans, flooding on the Shannon, etc. But the NPHET figures need strict scrutiny as they’re being used to justify what’s happening to the country. That is not happening, however.
What it has to do with this thread is that while RTE report on ‘fine mist hangs in the air for long time’ they don’t report in unbiased fashion on the Covid figures.
If 150 of the 300 cases that were recently published for a day’s figure were actually old contagious cases and the not-fit-for-purpose PCR test simply picked up on the remnants of an old virus, do you not see how this is significantly different to 300 people walking into a testing centre actively contagious?
Why would NPHET not want to stress the difference and ensure media outlets convey same?
A near-retired Doctor from the Midlands Hospital Group resigns and openly criticises the HSE/NPHET/Government. He’s then labelled the usual outlier etc, and the relevant bodies distance themselves from him and his comments. Do you think the 45 year old doc behind him or the 30 year old understudy disagrees with that doctor’s view? Or are they too scared to speak up with a career ahead of them. You think Dr. Feeney is the only qualified doctor in Ireland to think as he is regarding NPHET and the HSE?
I’m actually hearing his colleagues appreciated his stance and view it as him taking one for the team, believe it or not.
Regarding the Mater room study funding, do you not think that’s important information?
We clearly have massively different views on this Covid story.0 -
‘Great societal benefit’ isn’t actually a measure I use to critique things in front of me. No need to pretend it is. You know it isn’t.
This is what you posted;
"What great societal benefit did RTÉ viewers get from watching the report on the study?"
Now you say:
‘Great societal benefit’ isn’t actually a measure I use to critique things in front of me. No need to pretend it is. You know it isn’t."
I'll leave the evidence of your obvious disengenousness there for all to see."To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)
0 -
This is what you posted;
"WHAT GREAT SOCIETAL BENEFIT did RTÉ viewers get from watching the report on the study?"
Now you say:
‘Great societal benefit’ isn’t actually a measure I use to critique things in front of me. No need to pretend it is. You know it isn’t."
I'll leave the evidence of your obvious disengenousness there for all to see.
Cop on! You genuinely don’t think I was being flippant or facetious?! Who speaks like that and means it? More to the point, who grades, in the moment, what they’re watching and wondering how learned they and society will be after. Great societal benefit. Give over.
All the sh1te back and forth tonight and you focus on that?
Do you honestly suggest RTE is 100% being honest, open and as probing as can be in the coverage of all this Covid stuff? You’re not the RTE family member of the NPHET employee are you?0 -
Regarding the Mater room study funding, do you not think that’s important information?
It's highly important information.
HSE covid-19 guidance to date has been droplet heavy and solely focused on close contact or surfaces as the only way the virus is transmitted.
This research mentions not just droplets but covid-19 aerosols can remain present in a room/a space for up to an hour.0 -
It's highly important information.
HSE covid-19 guidance to date has been droplet heavy and solely focused on close contact or surfaces as the only way the virus is transmitted.
This research mentions not just droplets but covid-19 aerosols can remain present in a room/a space for up to an hour.
Yes, but who funded it? I still can’t find that out.
I suspect if you told a group of non-experts (whatever they are) that someone with Covid was in a sealed room, they’d all give the room a wide berth for a while. And then still make sure all surfaces are wiped down.
But if a room is windowless, wouldn’t people leave the door open upon exiting the room? So the ‘sealed’ room study is mostly theoretical.
I note from the HSE advice regarding restricting your movements, they’ve been saying since the early summer to have a window open in the room your isolating in. Again, that’s common sense, the HSE were aware of the benefits of airing a room and diluting the concentration of potentially infected air mass.
I just don’t see the benefit of this study. Even more so for the state broadcaster to spend time telling people that light, misted aerosols hang in the air.0 -
-
-
Whole thing is a joke. It's social distancing when it suits. I was inside in lidl today, they don't give a f00k about the virus. Ends of the isles had cases of drink protruding out into the isle forcing queuing customers closer to each other.
If the Government were serious about it they would have stopped supermarkets selling drink and made them free up the space to provide customers the chance to distance.
They should have let the publicans handle selling the drink0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement