To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Seanergy

weldoninhio wrote: »

Maybe the tagline should be changed, Boards.ie now ye're lying.

Or now your masking!

NovemberWren

@Seanergy. You really need to comprehend the 2xentendre of bill gates.

he knows full well that if people accept the mask; the global wealthy will walk on them.

Seanergy

NovemberWren wrote: »

@Seanergy. You really need to comprehend the 2xentendre of bill gates.

he knows full well that if people accept the mask; the global wealthy will walk on them.

We don't do masks in Ireland we do face coverings. Wrong thread.

astrofool

NovemberWren wrote: »

@Seanergy. You really need to comprehend the 2xentendre of bill gates.

he knows full well that if people accept the mask; the global wealthy will walk on them.

Outline the gap between a person wearing a mask to the global wealthy walking on them.

Even the next step, what will the "government" force people to do post pandemic?

Mrs OBumble

Masked Santa still managed to be a super-spreader:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/300184797/covid19-rest-home-volunteer-dressed-as-santa-infects-75-residents-in-superspreader-event


There really is no replacement for distancing.

odyssey06

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Masked Santa still managed to be a super-spreader:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/300184797/covid19-rest-home-volunteer-dressed-as-santa-infects-75-residents-in-superspreader-event
There really is no replacement for distancing.

No excuses for not distancing, but there could be more going on here in terms of who infected who...

One of Belgium's leading virologists doubted the man could be responsible for so many cases. "Even for a super-spreader, these are too many at once," said Marc Van Ranst of the Rega Institute for Medical Research.

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Masked Santa still managed to be a super-spreader:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/300184797/covid19-rest-home-volunteer-dressed-as-santa-infects-75-residents-in-superspreader-event

There really is no replacement for distancing.

It probably was Santa as he had tested positive 3 days before but there is no definitive proof as to whether Santa was the source of the infections as you stated in your opener, that would require an in-depth scientific investigation.

Maybe next time before you create mask bashing posts you might read from other sources rather than from stuff.co.nz.

The image in the article you linked to was stock photo. Here is the Santa in question.



A mask is only as good as it it put on. We have spoken in thread before about sloppy mask wearing and this is good example.

The staff should have known better than to let this aerosol generating baffoon into a high risk setting. A mask over a hairy wig, FFS. All the HCW's in this home failed to enage with their training, none of them reached out(buddy system) and make Santa wear his mask under his beard.

He could not have possibly spewed droplets and infected that many through his setup.

If it was solely him, which it looks like, we are more than likely talking aerosols and we are talking airborn in which case distancing plays a lesser part.

There is no replacement for isolating when positive.

Mrs OBumble

Seanergy wrote: »

It probably was Santa as he had tested positive 3 days before ....

There is no replacement for isolating when positive.

He tested positive three days AFTER the event.

Masks, even when properly worn, give a false sense of safety.

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

He tested positive three days AFTER the event.

Thanks, I concur, I mis read that part. Are you willing to concur that you were rash in attributing the blame on the Masked Santa?

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Masked Santa still managed to be a super-spreader:

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Masks, even when properly worn, give a false sense of safety.

We have been over this many times in thread. Pure BS.

Do you drive and if so does wearing your seatbelt give you a false sense of safety? Exactly.

weldoninhio

Seanergy wrote: »

We have been over this many times in thread. Pure BS.

Do you drive and if so does wearing your seatbelt give you a false sense of safety? Exactly.

Never heard of the Peltzman effect??

Seanergy

weldoninhio wrote: »

Absolute nonsense. “There is no back to normal”, absolute scutter. We’ll be back to normal by this time next year, if not months before that.

Seanergy wrote: »

You can keep your scutts, have a go at explaining back to normal. Willing to have a gentleman's side bet? tenner to charity we ain't back to normal this time next year. Not even half way yet, in my opinion.

Still awaiting an answer to this.

Seanergy

weldoninhio wrote: »

Never heard of the Peltzman effect??

Noticed that trended with the anti mask heads, still trending then.

I just shared that with Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan and he immediately threw his face covering and cycling helmet in the bin and stuck an I believe in Peltzman effect sticker on his bike.

odyssey06

weldoninhio wrote: »

Never heard of the Peltzman effect??

An interesting theory but it does not demonstrate eg that mandatory seat belts led to increased risk.

"Peltzman’s theory does not predict the magnitude of risk compensatory behaviour." Substantial further empirical work has found that the effect exists in many contexts but generally offsets less than half of the direct effect. In the U.S., motor vehicle fatalities per population declined by more than half from the beginning of regulation in the 1960s through 2012. Vehicle safety standards accounted for most of the reduction augmented by seat belt use laws, changes in the minimum drinking age, and reductions in teen driving.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation

Mrs OBumble

Seanergy wrote: »

We have been over this many times in thread. Pure BS.

Do you drive and if so does wearing your seatbelt give you a false sense of safety? Exactly.

Compared to having a spike mounted in front of my head, which will drill in if I crash at speed - yes it does.

But it's a false equivalence. People see a seatbelt and think of something that will reduce their injuries in the chance there's a crash. They don't think it will reduce the chance of a crash.

Whereas people see a mask and think "it's ok, we don't have to distance, we're both masked", ie they believe that using the mask actually reduces the chance of the adverse event even happening, not just makes it less severe. And - maybe it does reduce the chance. But it's not guaranteed.

Away With The Fairies

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Masked Santa still managed to be a super-spreader:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/300184797/covid19-rest-home-volunteer-dressed-as-santa-infects-75-residents-in-superspreader-event


There really is no replacement for distancing.

Are you trying to say masks don't work? If the picture posted by seanergy is real that might be the reason. Masks don't work with a big hairy beard.

Also, no talk of the man's behaviour. Did he arrive to the care home dressed like Santa or did he dress at the care home? Used a bathroom to dress up as Santa, and then the mask? Covid is airborne, so anybody using the bathroom he changed in would also get infected. There's so many questions.

Remember, the story of the two hairdressers in America, let's talk about them and how they didn't infect 140 of their customers. I wonder what played a part in that and being hairdressers, there would be very little distancing touching people's heads.

Mrs OBumble

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Are you trying to say masks don't work? If the picture posted by seanergy is real that might be the reason. Masks don't work with a big hairy beard.

Also, no talk of the man's behaviour. Did he arrive to the care home dressed like Santa or did he dress at the care home? Used a bathroom to dress up as Santa, and then the mask? Covid is airborne, so anybody using the bathroom he changed in would also get infected. There's so many questions.

You're just amplifying my point. We are advising people to mask - but we aren't telling hairy men to shave before using them. We're sympathising with people who's glasses fog up - but we aren't saying that's aerosol and that it's dangerous to let it escape.

The only way to make this event safe would have been for Santa to stay outside and wave at the residents through closed windows.

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Remember, the story of the two hairdressers in America, let's talk about them and how they didn't infect 140 of their customers. I wonder what played a part in that and being hairdressers, there would be very little distancing touching people's heads.

So despite aerosols escaping from the edges, they didn't infect anyone? That sounds pretty unlikely. There's as much chance they weren't actually infectious at the time as that the masks saved everyone.


To be clear, I'm not saying masks don't work. They certainly help reducing infection spread. But they aren't a universal panacea. They are of limited use without many other things also being in place. And they have side effects (personally I find it dangerous to walk down stairs in one, just cannot see where I'm going). And I've seen a lot of what I call "magic mask thinking", where people don't bother distancing because the masks make them feel safe.

Human immune and respiratory systems have evolved without fabric layers for thousands of years. Call me unconvinced that suddenly adding fabric layers can be done long-term without some pretty major, and likely unwanted, side-effects.

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Masked Santa still managed to be a super-spreader:

Bumble's has in haste wrongly attributed a super spreading event to a masked Santa and jumped on here to have a bash at masks with no evidence.

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Are you trying to say masks don't work? If the picture posted by seanergy is real that might be the reason. Masks don't work with a big hairy beard.

Bumble's is not just saying masks don't work, but masks act as a beacon for not needing or wanting to social distance. Yes picture posted by me is really of the masked Santa in question unlike the picture from Bumble's link on stuff.co.nz which had a stock photo of a masked Santa.

BTW none of the residents were masked and santa had masked helpers. Maybe the person who put up the decorations for the party loaded the air, no doubt more information will come to the surface.

If people are only thinking social distancing it is because that's been the major theme song of the HSE that's been on constant loop. Anyone can walk into and breath in some else's covid19 plume without breaking social distancing.

It's wrong for Bumble's to lump everyone who wears a mask into the same boat of thinking there is no need to distance because we see masks.

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

.

The only way to make this event safe would have been for Santa to stay outside and wave at the residents through closed windows.

Where is the proof Santa caused the super spread?

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

And I've seen a lot of what I call "magic mask thinking", where people don't bother distancing because the masks make them feel safe.

Pure BS again, now you are coining mask phrases out of thin air based on what you think people are feeling.

Seanergy

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

And they have side effects.....

Human immune and respiratory systems have evolved without fabric layers for thousands of years. Call me unconvinced that suddenly adding fabric layers can be done long-term without some pretty major, and likely unwanted, side-effects.

Humanity is no longer living in the ventilated conditions of thousands of years ago let alone 100 years ago. We are very much spending 90% of our time in internal spaces. Most of these internal spaces are air tight. What we are seeing now is the pretty major, and likely unwanted, side-effects.

Stop making up stuff about masks, blaming masks and creating fear.

robinph

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

So despite aerosols escaping from the edges, they didn't infect anyone? That sounds pretty unlikely. There's as much chance they weren't actually infectious at the time as that the masks saved everyone.

If it's the case of hairdressers that I've heard of then they certainly were infectious as their families and other staff were infected by them as they didn't wear masks in the staff area or at home.

Away With The Fairies

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

You're just amplifying my point. We are advising people to mask - but we aren't telling hairy men to shave before using them. We're sympathising with people who's glasses fog up - but we aren't saying that's aerosol and that it's dangerous to let it escape.

The only way to make this event safe would have been for Santa to stay outside and wave at the residents through closed windows.




So despite aerosols escaping from the edges, they didn't infect anyone? That sounds pretty unlikely. There's as much chance they weren't actually infectious at the time as that the masks saved everyone.


To be clear, I'm not saying masks don't work. They certainly help reducing infection spread. But they aren't a universal panacea. They are of limited use without many other things also being in place. And they have side effects (personally I find it dangerous to walk down stairs in one, just cannot see where I'm going). And I've seen a lot of what I call "magic mask thinking", where people don't bother distancing because the masks make them feel safe.

Human immune and respiratory systems have evolved without fabric layers for thousands of years. Call me unconvinced that suddenly adding fabric layers can be done long-term without some pretty major, and likely unwanted, side-effects.

They advised mask wearing last May, it didn't work so they mandated them. Makes me think they knew the benefits of masks back then but with the mixed messaging about masks so people weren't wearing them and had to mandate them.

What seanergy is saying is true about the aerosol spread. Distancing is useless with an airborne virus. It's very dangerous to be following those distancing rules at this stage. Yes, it's true aerosols escape from the side. But is it not better breathing into a mask and having the mask catch most of those aerosols... Therefore someone else that follows get a lesser dose.

odyssey06

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Compared to having a spike mounted in front of my head, which will drill in if I crash at speed - yes it does.
But it's a false equivalence. People see a seatbelt and think of something that will reduce their injuries in the chance there's a crash. They don't think it will reduce the chance of a crash.
Whereas people see a mask and think "it's ok, we don't have to distance, we're both masked", ie they believe that using the mask actually reduces the chance of the adverse event even happening, not just makes it less severe. And - maybe it does reduce the chance. But it's not guaranteed.

Anti lock braking systems then, the Peltzman effect there suggested cars following more closely as the drivers felt they could brake in time...
But the ABS systems overall safety effect negated this.

The messaging from the authorities has been pretty clear that masks do not protect the wearer though.
That was why we weren't advised to wear in spring.
I have seen distancing dropping in other environments, including outside, as I don't think people are concerned about single 'close passes'.

odyssey06

Models of droplet dispersal in corridors reveals 'wake' of droplets left behind:
https://scitechdaily.com/safe-social-distancing-alert-long-streams-of-virus-laden-droplets-can-trail-behind-infected-individuals/

weldoninhio

Seanergy wrote: »

Humanity is no longer living in the ventilated conditions of thousands of years ago let alone 100 years ago. We are very much spending 90% of our time in internal spaces. Most of these internal spaces are air tight. What we are seeing now is the pretty major, and likely unwanted, side-effects.

Stop making up stuff about masks, blaming masks and creating fear.

So how are people breathing?? You are talking nonsense. :rolleyes: Put a bag over your head, make sure it's airtight, have someone with you to wake you up when you pass out.

Seanergy

weldoninhio wrote: »

So how are people breathing?? You are talking nonsense. :rolleyes: Put a bag over your head, make sure it's airtight, have someone with you to wake you up when you pass out.

That's a horribly dangerous and irresponsible post. If anyone read that post do not attempt to do this at home. Do not attempt to do this anywhere.

Seanergy

weldoninhio wrote: »

So how are people breathing?? You are talking nonsense.

Through their nose and mouth, I really thought you would have had a grasp on that by now.

BTW I'm sick of you saying I'm talking nonsense.

Still waiting for a reply to my question and it's not a very difficult question. #2473

weldoninhio

Seanergy wrote: »

Through their nose and mouth, I really thought you would have had a grasp on that by now.

BTW I'm sick of you saying I'm talking nonsense.

Still waiting for a reply to my question and it's not a very difficult question. #2473

We are very much spending 90% of our time in internal spaces. Most of these internal spaces are air tight.

Sentence 1 is probably about right. Sentence 2 is absolute nonsense. Otherwise we'd either have to wear oxygen tanks in our "airtight" internal spaces, or we'd all be dead.

robinph

Just swap "air tight" to "not well ventilated" and move along.

You know perfectly well the point which was being made.