Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Face masks

Making your money go further
Loup321
Lemon Slice
Posts: 287
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 9:52 am
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 145 times

Re: Face masks

#325988

Postby Loup321 » July 14th, 2020, 10:12 am

If you want to protect yourself, then you need proper PPE masks. These are (I think) in short supply, and should be reserved for doctors, care workers, dentists, etc. who need them because they are coming into close contact with higher risks.

Face coverings, or poorly fitted inadequate "masks" (like decorating dust masks, for example), will slow down droplets leaving you, and limit them reaching and possibly infecting others. A scarf over your face is adequate for this - the droplets will be directed down onto your chest rather than around the enclosed space to infect others. One of my work colleagues is trying to use the phrase CPE - community protective equipment. You're not trying to protect yourself, but trying to protect others in case you are infected and infectious but don't know it.

I totally agree with the problems of taking the masks off, with the amount of potential source of infection now just transferred to my hands. Try taking them off from behind your ears or behind your head rather than from in front of your face. And then of course your face is itchy and hot, so you rub it. :roll:

Don't forget, seatbelts are completely unnecessary and do absolutely nothing until you are in a crash. And there have never been any double-blind tests on how effective parachutes are.

My daughter and I wear face coverings I made myself (we had a free afternoon and I got out the sewing machine). We wear them on public transport, where it is mandatory, but are not currently wearing them in shops. On a bus, we might sit or stand in close proximity to someone for 10-15 minutes. In a shop, I'm seldom near another person for as much as a minute, but I might need to speak to a member of staff, and I find it so much easier if I can also see their mouth and I have no (diagnosed) hearing problems.

Sorry, I've strayed from LBYM. Basically, wrap a scarf round your face like you do when it snows. You'll look really funny in a shop with the weather we're having at the moment though! :lol:

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7085
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3794 times

Re: Face masks

#325990

Postby Mike4 » July 14th, 2020, 10:14 am

dealtn wrote:Masks prevent dispersal of "droplets" at the time of coughing/sneezing. They are a barrier designed to do just that. But that barrier effectively provides a concentrated collection of those droplets, and furthermore provides a warm/moist environment in which they can thrive.

This strikes me as emotive claptrap. As I understand it the virus struggle to survive outside a host, let alone "thrive". The very best it can do outside of its host even in perfect conditions is attenuate less quickly than otherwise.

Besides, if the mask is 'full of virus' after wearing it for an hour it represents no risk to you, as you must have been the source of that virus in the first place.

Is there some scientific evidence that droplets "thrive" in a mask as you assert perhaps? I'd be interested to read it.

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Face masks

#325991

Postby dealtn » July 14th, 2020, 10:15 am

swill453 wrote:
dealtn wrote:Unfortunately most masks aren't as good, many wearers tend to touch their faces, dispose of them less frequently and less cautiously, and have less rigorous hand washing than professionals. So whilst "barriers" are good in catching droplets, the negative offsets of touching (and then touching other surfaces), changing the mask infrequently, relying on a false sense of security etc. all make the benefit less clear cut (and potentially a negative).

Agreed, but wearing a face covering (to protect others), and frequent handwashing or use of hand gel (to protect oneself) will be very effective. And the more people who do it, the more socially unacceptable it will be to not do it.

Scott.


Yes agreed.

But in practice we can't compel people to be in that "more" camp, nor accurately predict how many will act responsibly or not. It's life not a laboratory. It might turn out to be a good thing (from a healthcare perspective) or not (and similarly the economic benefits aren't clear either - do people feel safer and more likely to go out and spend, or feel restricted and can't be bothered to go out if you need to have a mask).

The hope has to be the former, but even if that isn't the case and it is healthcare negative, there is a second chance to educate on the "right way to behave when wearing a mask" so that the potential benefit isn't abandoned.

Again this is probably all off-topic for here, despite being scientifically interesting.

Cheap, and indeed free, is available to simply comply with what is legally required. But for better health outcomes, like in many things, you get what you pay for, and more expensive is better (but even better if they are used "correctly" which unfortunately means repeat expensive purchases). It's all a compromise.

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Face masks

#325994

Postby dealtn » July 14th, 2020, 10:21 am

Mike4 wrote:
dealtn wrote:Masks prevent dispersal of "droplets" at the time of coughing/sneezing. They are a barrier designed to do just that. But that barrier effectively provides a concentrated collection of those droplets, and furthermore provides a warm/moist environment in which they can thrive.

This strikes me as emotive claptrap. As I understand it the virus struggle to survive outside a host, let alone "thrive". The very best it can do outside of its host even in perfect conditions is attenuate less quickly than otherwise.

Besides, if the mask is 'full of virus' after wearing it for an hour it represents no risk to you, as you must have been the source of that virus in the first place.

Is there some scientific evidence that droplets "thrive" in a mask as you assert perhaps? I'd be interested to read it.


But the argument isn't that it is harmful to "you" the wearer, it is to prevent onward transmission.

In the same way you wouldn't want someone to sneeze on your face, you wouldn't volunteer to pick up all the tissues a sneezer had used over the day, particularly if those tissues weren't exposed to constant fresh air but were kept somewhere warm and moist where the "nasties" could stay alive and thrive.

This isn't Covid specific of course, and much more relevant to bacteria. But the point is behaviour is as important as barrier. I think this is all off topic for this Board, and a better place would be Science (where it has been discussed before).

Laughton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 905
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 2:15 pm
Has thanked: 140 times
Been thanked: 330 times

Re: Face masks

#326007

Postby Laughton » July 14th, 2020, 11:16 am

Thanks neversay. They've obviously just seen the new law mandating wearing from July 24th as the price is now £9.97 :roll:

richfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3492
Joined: November 19th, 2016, 2:02 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 1280 times

Re: Face masks

#326017

Postby richfool » July 14th, 2020, 11:36 am

It also acts as a visual reminder to people that there is a nasty virus about.


I also think there is an element of psychology involved, which shouldn't be overlooked or under-estimated, - that wearing masks reminds those around you to keep their distance (something which many people seem to overlook or ignore when out and in shops).

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10369
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3601 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Face masks

#326234

Postby Arborbridge » July 15th, 2020, 7:16 am

Bubblesofearth wrote:The science is totally clear. Ask any surgeon whether masks help prevent the spread of germs. It aint rocket science.
BoE



Unfortunately, the science is not totally clear, otherwise we would have the science community coming together as one - which they are not. Masks no doubt in principle do what you say, but in practice the effectiveness is not plain sailing. In short, there is the science of the physical barrier and there's the behavioural science of the practical application.

I refer you to the rest of the discussion which points out some of the problems. In my view, and that of many others, it is not as clear cut as one might think.


Arb.

Bubblesofearth
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1080
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:32 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 432 times

Re: Face masks

#326656

Postby Bubblesofearth » July 16th, 2020, 6:20 pm

Arborbridge wrote:Unfortunately, the science is not totally clear, otherwise we would have the science community coming together as one - which they are not. Masks no doubt in principle do what you say, but in practice the effectiveness is not plain sailing. In short, there is the science of the physical barrier and there's the behavioural science of the practical application.

I refer you to the rest of the discussion which points out some of the problems. In my view, and that of many others, it is not as clear cut as one might think.


Arb.


I think the politicians have envisaged lots of issues with masks just as they did with lockdown before it was mandated. But from what I've experienced in the last few days up here in Scotland the transition to masked shoppers has been pretty seamless. Certainly in my local shops compliance has been 100% and other measures such as social distancing have not been compromised. In short, most people seem to have embraced the changes advised and been pretty sensible about it.

Obviously this is just my personal experience but you only have to look at many Asian countries to see how mask wearing can become the new normal as and when required. It's not really a drama for most despite HMG and the media seeming to want to make it one.

BoE

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7085
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3794 times

Re: Face masks

#326661

Postby Mike4 » July 16th, 2020, 6:34 pm

richfool wrote:
It also acts as a visual reminder to people that there is a nasty virus about.


I also think there is an element of psychology involved, which shouldn't be overlooked or under-estimated, - that wearing masks reminds those around you to keep their distance (something which many people seem to overlook or ignore when out and in shops).


"An element"? One feels a right pillock putting a mask on and going outside in public for the first time. I think this is the beginning and end of most people's objection, however much they rationalise their objection in cod-science.

Fluke
Lemon Slice
Posts: 609
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 137 times

Re: Face masks

#326753

Postby Fluke » July 17th, 2020, 8:19 am

Arborbridge wrote:
Bubblesofearth wrote:The science is totally clear. Ask any surgeon whether masks help prevent the spread of germs. It aint rocket science.
BoE



Unfortunately, the science is not totally clear, otherwise we would have the science community coming together as one - which they are not. Masks no doubt in principle do what you say, but in practice the effectiveness is not plain sailing. In short, there is the science of the physical barrier and there's the behavioural science of the practical application.

I refer you to the rest of the discussion which points out some of the problems. In my view, and that of many others, it is not as clear cut as one might think.


Arb.


Chris Whitty - Chief Medical Officer - In March

Our advice is clear, wearing a mask, if you don’t have an infection, really reduces the risk almost not at all. We do not advise that.

Professor Jonathan Van-Tam - Mr Whitty's deputy

There is no evidence that the wearing of face masks by healthy members of the public slows the spread of the virus

To Mike4 who asked

Is there some scientific evidence that droplets "thrive" in a mask as you assert perhaps? I'd be interested to read it.[


How about Dr Jenny Harries - another of Mr Whitty's deputies back in March

masks can make things worse because they can be stored in dirty places and become containers for infection. You can actually trap the virus in the mask and then start breathing in

And to Bubblesofearth who suggests asking a surgeon about the usefulness of wearing masks, well yeah but peering into an open wound for an hour while removing your appendix is not quite the same thing as walking past someone in a supermarket now is it ;)

The mandating of the wearing of masks now is more to do with encouraging people out into the high street and back to work who are terrified (or who say they are) of picking up the virus, and not a lot to do with preventing the spread of the disease. The thing that prevents the spread of the disease is the hand washing and the social distancing.

The wearing of face masks in the Far East is traditional and cultural, they are super hygienic people anyway and it is considered the height of rudeness not to wear a mask if you have so much as a snivel, this long predates C19. The low rates of infection in those countries are more to do with their 'natural' social distancing (i.e. no hugging/handshaking) and hand washing, not so much to do with the masks I don't think.

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10023 times

Re: Face masks

#326756

Postby Itsallaguess » July 17th, 2020, 8:27 am

Fluke wrote:
Chris Whitty - Chief Medical Officer - In March

Our advice is clear, wearing a mask, if you don’t have an infection, really reduces the risk almost not at all. We do not advise that.

Professor Jonathan Van-Tam - Mr Whitty's deputy

There is no evidence that the wearing of face masks by healthy members of the public slows the spread of the virus

To Mike4 who asked

Is there some scientific evidence that droplets "thrive" in a mask as you assert perhaps? I'd be interested to read it.[


The mandating of the wearing of masks now is more to do with encouraging people out into the high street and back to work who are terrified (or who say they are) of picking up the virus, and not a lot to do with preventing the spread of the disease.


I don't think that's telling the whole story..

Back in March the level of asymptomatic cases weren't at all appreciated by Sage, which led to both the guidance given above, and also indirectly to many of the early issues seen in the Care Home settings.

I think there's an element of recognition around the high level and high risk of asymptomatic cases in the current mask guidance, beyond the above March quotes where it wasn't seen as such a high risk...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Fluke
Lemon Slice
Posts: 609
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 137 times

Re: Face masks

#326762

Postby Fluke » July 17th, 2020, 8:47 am

Itsallaguess wrote:
I don't think that's telling the whole story..

Back in March the level of asymptomatic cases weren't at all appreciated by Sage, which led to both the guidance given above, and also indirectly to many of the early issues seen in the Care Home settings.

I think there's an element of recognition around the high level and high risk of asymptomatic cases in the current mask guidance, beyond the above March quotes where it wasn't seen as such a high risk...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess


Maybe not but to say that "the science is totally clear" is wrong, it isn't, and have you seen any retractions to the above statements, I haven't, they've just been brushed aside. I don't doubt that we will all start wearing masks as requested, I've already started, but I'd like to extend the request to joggers who huff and puff all over the flippin place unmuzzled. How's that okay?

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10369
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3601 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Face masks

#326767

Postby Arborbridge » July 17th, 2020, 9:01 am

I agree Fluke's post was based on older statements, but nevertheless he is correct in saying the science isn't totally clear. There have been scientists on the radio expressing the opinion that the argument is finely balanced and the misuse of masks could be a disadvantage - not a good thing.
And as he says, none of those previous statements have been retracted.

I'm more of the opinion that it's all to do with getting the economy moving, not public health. It'll make damn all difference to the spread of the virus in most situations - even shops. In any case the last thing we need is people wearing masks thinking they can hover close to you, whereas now, everyone is super polite and cautious. This is just an instruction to make us feel we are doing something -like the ship's captain asking the passengers to pull on a rope in a storm.

Of course, we'll all wear masks when we have to - that's what we do - but until then, I'm not going to unless there is a press of human beings, in which case I'll just go somewhere else, most likely.


Arb.

stockton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 326
Joined: November 30th, 2016, 7:19 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Face masks

#326784

Postby stockton » July 17th, 2020, 9:50 am

The argument about face masks reminds me of the arguments about stomach ulcers and antibiotics which went on for years in the 1980s.
Ten years later the only outstanding question was " How did they find so many incompetent professionals to opine on medical matters ? "

Bubblesofearth
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1080
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:32 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 432 times

Re: Face masks

#326797

Postby Bubblesofearth » July 17th, 2020, 10:32 am

Fluke wrote:
Maybe not but to say that "the science is totally clear" is wrong, it isn't, and have you seen any retractions to the above statements, I haven't, they've just been brushed aside.


If you are talking about evidence-based population studies then the science isn't clear, or even present, for many of the restrictions put in place, including social distancing. But it is self-evident that being further away from someone will reduce the likelihood of transmission and it is self-evident that having a barrier in front of your face that absorbs droplets and reduces mass air-flow will reduce the amount of droplet-borne viruses emitted into the air. As I've pointed out in a previous post you can demonstrate this with a spray bottle and piece of cloth.

Most of the objections to masks are not about their ability to reduce emissions but about how they are used. I agree with that but the only way they will get to be used correctly is for people to start using them. There may be a learning curve but once we get there then the benefits will be worth the effort. IMO of course!

BoE

feder1
Lemon Slice
Posts: 477
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 8:28 am
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 59 times

Re: Face masks

#326824

Postby feder1 » July 17th, 2020, 12:12 pm

Here is free idea for a new business venture:

Making and selling face masks for mink!

There are 100 000 of the furry loveleys in cages in Spain atm and they are about to be culled i.e. killed because they have the coronavirus.

Since face masks are so effective now, then we can look forward to our mink coats and hats for winter after all!

I will invest once this gets into the FtSe 100.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10369
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3601 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Face masks

#327178

Postby Arborbridge » July 19th, 2020, 7:49 am

Mike4 wrote:The countries that have had the most success at controlling COVID wear face coverings in public as a matter of courtesy to others. The countries that have done worst, won't.

So do what the successful countries do. It's as simple as that.


Actually, it's far more complex than that, as you well know. There are other things which other countries do quite differently too, and one cannot just conclude that it is one factor making the difference.

Arb.

gryffron
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3606
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
Has thanked: 550 times
Been thanked: 1586 times

Re: Face masks

#327223

Postby gryffron » July 19th, 2020, 11:07 am

Arborbridge wrote:Actually, it's far more complex than that, as you well know. There are other things which other countries do quite differently too, and one cannot just conclude that it is one factor making the difference.

Indeed. Far Eastern cultures are much less "huggy-kissy" than Most Europeans, Americans, and even Arab men. Personal space is much more highly respected. Well, unless you get on the public transport. Orientals don't even like to shake hands. It's a custom they have adopted from the West. But when they do so they barely touch. Even the traditionally reserved British are more touchy-feely than Orientals.

Gryff

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7085
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3794 times

Re: Face masks

#327308

Postby Mike4 » July 19th, 2020, 4:37 pm

Fluke wrote:Well I too have a snood which I'd forgotten about, a thin one that I used to use a lot for hill walking so just fished it out from the back of a drawer, I'll use that for the time being and see how it goes. I suppose a thin scarf might do just as well flung round the neck and held up loosely by the glasses, quite like that look actually. Having warn a surgical mask day in day out for the best part of 10 years I'm strongly of the view they do little good, a view backed up several times btw by the governments own medical advisors at the daily stand ups. But I will go will go with the flow and do as I'm told, I certainly don't want to incur the wrath of my fellow shoppers never mind about the fine.

I'm not sure how wearing one every day for ten years qualifies anyone to know if that mask helped that person avoid infecting another human being.

stevensfo
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3437
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 8:43 am
Has thanked: 3808 times
Been thanked: 1398 times

Re: Face masks

#327340

Postby stevensfo » July 19th, 2020, 7:05 pm

I've been reading this thread with a feeling of despair, disgust and....choose adjective of your choice.

I work in North Italy and we have all watched/ are watching the goings-on in the UK. Who needs a dystopian film on Netflix when you have the real thing? The daily news on Yahoo from the UK beats any plot from EastEnders or Coronation Street.

Down in the real world, we all wear masks, have hand sanitisers in shops, and temperature checks in large shops. You cannot gain entry anywhere without a simple mask. Without a simple mask to stop your snot and cough, you will not be allowed anywhere. Why should we put up with egoistic and stupid prats? Stick to your online ordering, read your tabloid papers (where do the owners live?) and don't come out!

I don't see a problem with that. Wearing a thin mask protects others from your coughs, and using sanitisers will limit any contamination to trolley handles etc.

I no longer read the news from the UK. They have all the data from South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan etc on the one hand, and Brazil, Netherlands and USA on the other.

For the last 5 months!! Yet only now are they talking about masks being obligatory?

What the hell is going on in the UK? Who needs to visit North Korea when you can have the same experience just staying home and watching TV?


Steve


Return to “Living Below Your Means”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests