To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

robinph

Lex Luthor wrote: »

everyone is different in how much volume of air they inhale & exhale

Why are you suddenly unable to quote extensive statistics to us at this point. You've been giving us a multitude of numbers about CO2 concentrations in regular air, exhaled air, air in a scuba tank and air in a paper bag... But the volume of air being exhaled by the lungs and the volume of air between your face and mask is suddenly too complicated a number to be able to provide.

There must be an approximate number you can give?

Thats me

Lex Luthor wrote: »

I'm glad you mentioned that the level of CO2 in exhaled air is 40,000ppm

Inhaled air is 100 times less at approx 400ppm, but can rise to 1000ppm indoors if the room is not ventilated but still considered safe

SO inside the mask, the levels can reach much higher than inhaled air but lower than exhaled air due to leakage

OK. Lets me repeat.

You exhaling 3 liters of air into mask. Your exhalation replacing everything what was preserved within tiny volume between mask and your face. Your "fully calibrated CO2 detector" should show 40000 ppm. If it can. Couple reasons why it does not could happen:

1. Range of the device is limited by 12K
2. Device has volume inside which is not well ventilated

You inhaling 3 liters of air into mask. Your inhalation replacing everything what was preserved within tiny volume between mask and your face. Your "fully calibrated CO2 detector" should show 400-1000 ppm. If it still showing 12K then i'd presume your sensor is simply not ventilated at all.

And the main issue in your logics. Regardless of whatever your "fully calibrated CO2 detector" would detect in 50 ml volume of undermask space, this will be dissolved by 3 liters of external air while you inhaling, so your CO2 dose, so you still inhaling air with normal concentration of CO2 if external air is well ventilated.

Thats me

Lex Luthor wrote: »

The detector I used picks up CO2, its not an FTIR analyzer that breaks down each molecule within the air composition, it specifically monitors for CO2

What was the model of sensor used?

Lex Luthor

Thats me wrote: »

What was the model of sensor used?

Its a Honeywell Midas Gas Detector using a 0-2% v/v CO2 cartridge for the purpose of the tests

Lex Luthor

robinph wrote: »

Why are you suddenly unable to quote extensive statistics to us at this point. You've been giving us a multitude of numbers about CO2 concentrations in regular air, exhaled air, air in a scuba tank and air in a paper bag... But the volume of air being exhaled by the lungs and the volume of air between your face and mask is suddenly too complicated a number to be able to provide.

There must be an approximate number you can give?

like I said, the volume of air exhaled by each person is different due to age, size of person etc, but the average is 500ml but you could have googled that anyway

robinph

Lex Luthor wrote: »

like I said, the volume of air exhaled by each person is different due to age, size of person etc, but the average is 500ml but you could have googled that anyway

And how much air is within the mask/ face space?


I have been Googling, but as you are using a different version of the Internet than the rest of us wanted to check what your version said as the answer could have been 2 potatoes for all we know.

Thats me

Lex Luthor wrote: »

Its a Honeywell Midas Gas Detector using a 0-2% v/v CO2 cartridge for the purpose of the tests

Ahh, they writing Response Time < 70 seconds so you probably have values averaged over whole minute time interval which gives us something like average temperature of all patients hospital - there is some value, but it makes no any sense.

Lex Luthor

robinph wrote: »

And how much air is within the mask/ face space?


I have been Googling, but as you are using a different version of the Internet than the rest of us wanted to check what your version said as the answer could have been 2 potatoes for all we know.

its irrelevant as the concentration of CO2 is % volume, so whether it be A or B litres, the concentration is similar

I am measuring the conc of CO2 under a mask worn as it should be, the tighter the mask the higher the concentration, the looser the mask the lower

sorry if you cant understand that

robinph

Lex Luthor wrote: »

its irrelevant as the concentration of CO2 is % volume, so whether it be A or B litres, the concentration is similar

I am measuring the conc of CO2 under a mask worn as it should be, the tighter the mask the higher the concentration, the looser the mask the lower

sorry if you cant understand that

Well it's relavent if there is less than half a liter of air in that space that you'll be breathing in with the next breath. Or are we back to you claiming its a sealed system and no air coming in from outside the mask again.

In the next breath what volume is air from your last breath out with your raised CO2 measure and what volume is from outside the mask so presumably with perfectly fine CO2 levels?

weldoninhio

Lex Luthor wrote: »

its irrelevant as the concentration of CO2 is % volume, so whether it be A or B litres, the concentration is similar

I am measuring the conc of CO2 under a mask worn as it should be, the tighter the mask the higher the concentration, the looser the mask the lower

sorry if you cant understand that

Lex, you can’t win in here. Feelings trump facts in 2020. People “feel” safe in masks, therefore they work. Actual evidence is pointless in the face of the cartoon the maskers have showing mask effectiveness.

Lex Luthor

weldoninhio wrote: »

Lex, you can’t win in here. Feelings trump facts in 2020. People “feel” safe in masks, therefore they work. Actual evidence is pointless in the face of the cartoon the maskers have showing mask effectiveness.

seems that way alright

robinph

weldoninhio wrote: »

Lex, you can’t win in here. Feelings trump facts in 2020. People “feel” safe in masks, therefore they work. Actual evidence is pointless in the face of the cartoon the maskers have showing mask effectiveness.

Quite right too, no place for feelings on this matter we want facts...

Lex Luthor wrote: »

ok, she didnt say anything and if she did I would have pointed out her actions, so as far as I'm concerned masks are filthy and disgusting and not good for you due to the breathing in of your own CO2 so anyone who is wearing them in my opinon is making the situation worse

Oh!

Lex Luthor

robinph wrote: »

Well it's relavent if there is less than half a liter of air in that space that you'll be breathing in with the next breath. Or are we back to you claiming its a sealed system and no air coming in from outside the mask again.

In the next breath what volume is air from your last breath out with your raised CO2 measure and what volume is from outside the mask so presumably with perfectly fine CO2 levels?

next breath takes in approx 500ml of air through the mask and various sides, mixing that with the exhaled air which comprises of CO2 that isnt expelled fully due to the mask, hence the elevated levels of CO2 compared to what you would have if you werent wearing a mask which would be typically between 400-1000ppm

Just ask yourself the question, if a firefighter was going into an emergency situation and was given the choice of 2 tanks
1. Compressed fresh air with nominal value of 0.04% CO2 v/v or
2. Air exhaled with elevated levels of CO2

I know which one they choose every time

OVER & OUT...!!!

martingriff

Lex Luthor wrote: »

You choose to believe the media and I choose to believe what I recorded in many tests

Its also not true in that article regarding the lower of oxygen levels while wearing a face mask. We've tested this also and it does

Its entirely up to you

So why should we believe your tests where we have no evidence of them over published and I say reviwed papers

Lex Luthor

martingriff wrote: »

So why should we believe your tests where we have no evidence of them over published and I say reviwed papers

I have already said you can believe them or not, they are my opinion

this is a forum for debate

you get your point across and I'll say mine

my tests are based on years of experience and equipment that I know is calibrated

we go our separate ways

robinph

Lex Luthor wrote: »

next breath takes in approx 500ml of air through the mask and various sides, mixing that with the exhaled air which comprises of CO2 that isnt expelled fully due to the mask, hence the elevated levels of CO2 compared to what you would have if you werent wearing a mask which would be typically between 400-1000ppm

Just ask yourself the question, if a firefighter was going into an emergency situation and was given the choice of 2 tanks
1. Compressed air with nominal value of 0.04% CO2 v/v or
2. Air exhaled with elevated levels of CO2

I know which one they choose every time

OVER & OUT...!!!

So you have a concentration that you've claimed for the CO2 hanging around in the mask, what did you measure for the CO2 concentration in that next 500ml of air which entered the lungs?

Was it actually elevated from normal air, or essentially exactly the same because the volume of air in your mask is inconsequential? Does all of the exhaled air hanging around in the mask reenter the lungs on the next breath, or is it only a small fraction of that small amount of air hanging around in the mask space?

pjohnson

Lex Luthor wrote: »

I have already said you can believe them or not, they are my opinion

this is a forum for debate

you get your point across and I'll say mine

my tests are based on years of experience and equipment that I know is calibrated

we go our separate ways

At least you call them opinion and arent pretending they are facts then.

Lex Luthor

robinph wrote: »

So you have a concentration that you've claimed for the CO2 hanging around in the mask, what did you measure for the CO2 concentration in that next 500ml of air which entered the lungs?

already explained this
Air has 0.04% v/v of CO2

robinph wrote: »

Was it actually elevated from normal air, or essentially exactly the same because the volume of air in your mask is inconsequential? Does all of the exhaled air hanging around in the mask reenter the lungs on the next breath, or is it only a small fraction of that small amount of air hanging around in the mask space?

looks like you are almost starting to understand the concept now

robinph

If you've found any of those articles about how air systems were upgraded in operating theatres due to surgeons collapsing from CO2 poisoning, or the staff in Tesco all collapsing from wearing masks all day, then would probably be useful to share with the class as well.

robinph

Lex Luthor wrote: »

already explained this
Air has 0.04% v/v of CO2




looks like you are almost starting to understand the concept now

OK, so what are the numbers for the CO2 being inhaled?

Away With The Fairies

Lex Luthor wrote: »

They have done this and yet nobody adheres to it
Like I said, masks are being re-used, people constantly touching them

We are in flu season and if people continue to touch their face and mask more frequently and then touch surroundings, in my opinion its a lot worse than no masks, which we had in the summer and "cases" came right down

However, as I mentioned its flu season and cases for corona virus will be higher but thats another debate



The detector is measuring the levels of CO2 inside the mask

I'm glad you mentioned that the level of CO2 in exhaled air is 40,000ppm

Inhaled air is 100 times less at approx 400ppm, but can rise to 1000ppm indoors if the room is not ventilated but still considered safe

SO inside the mask, the levels can reach much higher than inhaled air but lower than exhaled air due to leakage

OSHA levels for CO2 for an 8hr exposure level is 5000ppm. Most gas detectors manufactured come with default alarm levels of 5,000ppm for evacuation

I can tell you now if you were working in a room in any industry with a risk to exposure to CO2, you would be out of that room at 5000ppm and not allowed back in

ok so now I hear the counter argument for this being an 8hr period of exposure

so the 15min NIOSH STEL level for CO2 is 30,000ppm

you have school kids wearing them for periods of 2-3hrs during the day in schools

all I am saying imo is the potential long term effects of wearing a mask due to elevated CO2 levels cannot be good for the body and the harm vs good argument of wearing a mask vs the risk of catching a corona virus dont warrant the wearing of them

How is someone touching their mask and then their surroundings alot worse than no masks?

No masks and you'll have everyone just breathing out viral particles in the air and land on the surroundings.

We're not all thick as sh!t because you see a few people touching their face masks. So with face masks, you have people wearing them properly and not touching their face mask and others who do. It's a no brainer there that it's less spread.

Touching things isn't how covid spread, so not sure why you're upset at people touching things. It's droplets and aerosols that is the main way it's spread. And wearing a mask that contains most of an infected person's droplets and aerosols is better than nothing.

FlubberJones

I wear a mask whenever in shops or enclosed spaces, I feel it does some for of covid restriction and will go with it until someone tells me that it doesnt.

Dr golden 2

My town is littered with facemasks, it's like plasticbags pre 2002 all over again.

Away With The Fairies

Dr golden 2 wrote: »

My town is littered with facemasks, it's like plasticbags pre 2002 all over again.

They're everywhere and it's disgusting to see. Can't believe people just throw them away. Take your thrash home with you, it's not that hard.

GT89

This one is on the government they were the ones who want people to wear these masks. They are useless and they don't work all they are doing is causing litter. Go to Sweden and you won't find any face nappies dumped on the ground because they are not required there anywhere. The same people who support Greta Thunberg and lecture us about climate are now telling you to wear masks which are being littered everywhere.

Away With The Fairies

GT89 wrote: »

This one is on the government they were the ones who want people to wear these masks. They are useless and they don't work all they are doing is causing litter. Go to Sweden and you won't find any face nappies dumped on the ground because they are not required there anywhere.

Face nappies? Is your arse on your face?

stargazer 68

Wouldn't make a blind bit of difference IMO. We have them at all the hospital entrances and exits and still find them all around the grounds.

GT89

GT89 wrote: »

This one is on the government they were the ones who want people to wear these masks. They are useless and they don't work all they are doing is causing litter. Go to Sweden and you won't find any face nappies dumped on the ground because they are not required there anywhere. The same people who support Greta Thunberg and lecture us about climate are now telling you to wear masks which are being littered everywhere.

If I go to Japan I won't find any littered on the ground either.

Pitch n Putt

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

How is someone touching their mask and then their surroundings alot worse than no masks?

No masks and you'll have everyone just breathing out viral particles in the air and land on the surroundings.

We're not all thick as sh!t because you see a few people touching their face masks. So with face masks, you have people wearing them properly and not touching their face mask and others who do. It's a no brainer there that it's less spread.

Touching things isn't how covid spread, so not sure why you're upset at people touching things. It's droplets and aerosols that is the main way it's spread. And wearing a mask that contains most of an infected person's droplets and aerosols is better than nothing.

Infected people shouldn’t be out and about....

They’re supposed to be at home for 14 days to recover from covid most probably didn’t know they had in the first instance.


And if people don’t even know they have it and are out and about feeling fine, well it’s probably not as serious a virus as is been made out every single day for the last 9 months....

bush

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

No masks and you'll have everyone just breathing out viral particles in the air and land on the surroundings.

Do people normally go around breathing like dragons on everything?