I can blow a massive holes in the "must wear masks" montra

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
You banging on about vaccines for other than covid.....and making out they are the same.

So I guess smallpox vaccines (tetanus, polio...) were pointless. Oh, wait.

These are Sterilizing vaccines.......they stop infection.

Just like all vaccines do. Including the COVID vaccines.

The covid vaccines don't stop infection.

They are not the same.

And what's the point in a vaccine if it does not prevent Delta btw?

a reply to: scrounger


The primary use of masks is to contain the amount of viral load when you exhale, or sneeze so your fellow citizen is better protected from the virus floating in the air.

It’s a thoughtful thing to do!

Everybody who wants to be informed knows this. Willful ignorance at this point is clearly fueled by your own political agenda.

Shame on you for perpetuating false information and endangering more lives.

Cheap masks that don’t seal don’t prevent anything.

It’s no different than wearing a N-95 mask with an exit valve.

If cloth mask are effect, why the call to double mask. When at that point it would be better to advise people to wear an effective mask like an N-95 without an exit valve. A mask that actual seals. Than wearing two cheap A$$ masks that don’t do crap.

a reply to: neutronflux

Cheap masks are definitely less effective, but they’re not ineffective. There’s a difference!

Anything that helps to diminish the spread of the virus is a good thing. No…?

originally posted by: neutronflux
Cheap masks that don’t seal don’t prevent anything.

Wouldn't a mask that doesn't seal prevent airborne droplets from traveling as far as if no mask were worn? Isn't that something?

a reply to: scrounger
I live in a city where the evidence of anthropological occupation ,
shows a scourage of biological debris , festering a brew in every puddle of low pavement.
I would be more concerned about what "Hitchhikes" on the bottom of
our shoes might we inbed into the "dodge ram " carpeting , or imprint onto our living room
floors .

but where have you got these processes from ?
What has led you to become educated on how well these paper masks work and in what scenarios you can re use them ?
Diddnt you get told to wear them everywhere ?
Why listen to that part of their rules, but not the rest ?
My point is peoples logic is inconsistent when it comes to things like this.
Government tells people to wear a mask, people do it. Govment then tells people you don't have to wear a mask (UK laws) and people still wear them.
Seems like people are inconsistent to me. IMO
a reply to: CrazeeWorld777

Again.

Most masks people wear, if worn correctly, are only 40 percent effective.

Would you rely on a condom 40 percent effective at capturing sperm and preventing passing biological contaminates along like STD’s? When there are better on the market?

Would you wear a second condom over the first like we were told to double mask?

Do you think capturing only 400,000 sperm out every 1,000,000 million is going to have a serious impact on pregnancy rates?

And. Again. How is wearing a cheap mask that doesn’t seal and has leak by where the fabric meets the skin any different from a N-95 mask with an exit valve that doesn’t filter your breath?

Are you basing your 40 percent on the person breathing in?

What's the percentage on breathing out and the virus?

If it's a 40 percent improvement on breathing in covid 19 and a 40 percent reduction on breathing it out then that's a decent reason for masking if you ask me.


a reply to: neutronflux

a reply to: nonspecific

You

Are you basing your 40 percent on the person breathing in

Do you have any other data? Can you cite a mask that is actually made to hold in your breath? And capture snot and drool so it cannot be atomized when the material is moist from body fluid. Masks are made to keep you from breathing stuff in. Hence the name personal protective equipment, not social protective equipment. Not made to capture ad hold the body fluids you expel.

What's the percentage on breathing out and the virus?

You tell me.

Not mush use if breath is slipping by between the mask and skin unfiltered.

a reply to: neutronflux

A 40% effective condom would reduce pregancies by roughly 40% - it would almost halve unwanted pregancies which is a serious reduction of several hundred million per year globally which is a pretty big number.

Unlike pregancies viruses spread exponentially. When dealing with an viruses that spread exponentially a 40% reduction is a huge ammount that significantly reduces the R rate and reverses the spread of infection.

While what you state is true for highly trained and disiplined people handling bio-weapons, WMD and the like it's not practical or possible to mandate everyone wears HAZMAT suits. People cry about not being able to breate and getting CO2 poisoning through the paper thin ones, no one would comply with mandates to wear sealing masks as they actually do restrict breathing.

The general public aren't trained or competent enough the maintain and service masks - it's why the advice is to use a combo of mask, hand sanitiser and social distancing. People aren't advised to solely rely on masks and are regualrly told they offer little to no protection to the wearer.

It's more like people being told to wear a 40% condom, a 50% contraceptive pill and 60% coil to reduce pregancy which is far more effective than relying on condomd which are 98% effective at best.

I'm using your figures not mine.

I'd have thought that if as you say a mask will be 40 percent effective against covid inhalation then it would have a similar effect with exhalation right?

Let's take a million covids. 1,000,000. If it's 40 percent effective then I breath out 600,000 of those covids correct?

If your mask is 40 percent effective then of those now 600,000 covids you breath in 360,000 covids.

So of the 1,000,000 covids 64 percent have been eliminated by mask wearing.

If I've got this wrong then tell me how, maths is not something I'm good with.

I personally think a 64 percent reduction for wearing some little masks is pretty decent.



a reply to: neutronflux

a reply to: bastion

You

A 40% effective condom would reduce pregancies by roughly 40

I never used the phrase in my example of percentage of preventing pregnancy.

I have always made my example related to efficiency of capturing items.

We are talking about filter efficiency. The question is how efficient are masks at capturing enough crap to have a measurable impact to reduce infections.

If a mask doesn’t seal. It has leak by that doesn’t capture crap, like an N-95 with an exit valve.

But thank you for ignoring what is actually posted, the actual wording, and the false argument.

a reply to: nonspecific

You

If your mask is 40 percent effective then of those now 600,000 covids you breath in 360,000 covids.

So of the 1,000,000 covids 64 percent have been eliminated by mask wearing.

But is that reduction enough to have an actual statistical and measurable impact in cases of covid.


Can you say letting 360,000 covids loose is a reliable and measurable means to prevent new cases? As in using a mask to capture what a person breathes out? Is that with every breath?

When people can wear a N-95 mask that elements almost any aspect of them breathing in a covid virus, and would filter out almost all viruses as long as the mask is properly worn and stays dry?

a reply to: nonspecific

IIRC 40% is the exhalation figure with 90 - 95% saliva, droplets caputured in unfitted homemade masks. 8% is the rough inhalation figure.

I have to rush out for a conference so haven't got time to plug them into the equation for covid spread but as time (t) tends to infinity the effectiveness/net reduction rate tends to 100% in a cascade effect due to the reduction in (N) infected individuals when compared to no masks being worn.

I honestly couldn't say.

In my opinion though wearing a mask that is 64 percent effective in a shop combined with better sanitisation and social distancing must have an impact on the spread of covid 19.

For me I limit my time in crowded areas and am mindful of my actions and wear a mask when I do. I'm double jabbed and pretty healthy for my age although I do smoke.

I'd say that all those things combined I'm on a good position to either not get the virus or at worst get the virus with no serious health issues and limit my ability to spread it.

Take away any of those multiple factors and you change the odds don't you agree?


a reply to: neutronflux

a reply to: nonspecific

You have this angle….

————

Used this in another thread.

I love to recycle…

The Delta Variant Will Drive A Steep Rise In U.S. COVID Deaths, A New Model Shows

www.npr.org...

Wow. Despite masks being available? With no listings in the article what factor masks may make.

It’s like they project these crazy high inflated projections

Then when the real numbers are way low, it’s “masks didn't prevent the spread but they helped”….

Remember when…

APRIL 21, 2020 3:05PM
How One Model Simulated 2.2 Million U.S. Deaths from COVID-19

www.cato.org...

A month later that 2.2 million estimate was still being used (without revealing the source) by President Trump and Doctors Fauci and Birx to imply that up to two million lives had been saved by state lockdowns and business closings and/or by federal travel bans.

But…. Same source

The key premise of 81% of the population being infected should have raised more alarms than it did. Even the deadly "Spanish Flu" (H1N1) pandemic of 1918-19 infected no more than 28% of the U.S. population. The next H1N1 "Swine Flu" pandemic in 2009-10, infected 20-24% of Americans.

To push the percentage infected up from 20-28% to an unprecedented 81% for COVID-19 required assuming the number of cases and/or deaths keeps doubling every three or four days for months (deaths were predicted to peak July 20). And that means assuming the estimated reproduction number (R0) of 2.4 remains high, and people keep mingling with different groups, until nearly everyone gets infected. Long before 8 out of 10 people became infected, however, a larger and larger percentage of the population would have recovered from the disease and become immune, so a smaller and smaller share would still remain susceptible

Now this is important

From above… “ To push the percentage infected up from 20-28% to an unprecedented 81% for COVID-19”

Now let’s use New York as example…

Study estimates nearly 1 in 4 New Yorkers had COVID-19 early in pandemic

www.ny1.com...

So. Even with unprecedented mask mandates, lockdowns, business closures, personnel protection equipment and techniques, hand sanitizer, and the technology to shop and work from home. New York fell into the usual percentage of expected infections within error of analysis.

Cheap masks had no statistical impact on the spread of covid.

An artificial projection and unrealistic model was created for the covid narrative in the USA that gave a lot of wiggle room for claiming what “worked”.

originally posted by: CyberBuddha
a reply to: scrounger


The primary use of masks is to contain the amount of viral load when you exhale, or sneeze so your fellow citizen is better protected from the virus floating in the air.

It’s a thoughtful thing to do!

Everybody who wants to be informed knows this. Willful ignorance at this point is clearly fueled by your own political agenda.

Shame on you for perpetuating false information and endangering more lives.

If that's the case, do you advocate for full time mask wearing, just to be thoughtful?

a reply to: neutronflux

I didn't ignore any of your post.

You asked if a 40% effective condom would have any meaningful impact on pregnancy rates

'Do you think capturing only 400,000 sperm out every 1,000,000 million is going to have a serious impact on pregnancy rates?'

Rates and efficiency are measured in percentages hence me answering your question by providing the percentage decrease in pregnancy rates.

If you didn't want to know the percentage reduction in pregnancy why would ask what the preganacy reduction rate is? If you want I can display it 40 in every 100 or 2/5ths of all pregancies but you're obviouly capable of that because you converted percentages to decimalised versions in your post and question.

Still have the first and only mask I was given by a co-worker. Refuse to use any other. It's dirty as f*ck but I really don't care since it's not preventing anything.