3225
Comments (359)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
PM_ME_UR_MAGIC_CARDS 1 point ago +2 / -1

Me: provides evidence

Some retard: tHeReS nO eViDEncE eVr

0
Ih8leftists 0 points ago +1 / -1

What is the link? I don't click on links that don't identify themselves easily.

It shows that any random cloth covering will ACTUALLY FILTER virus sized sub micron particles!?

2
PM_ME_UR_MAGIC_CARDS 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's an academic publication. How about you stop being retarded and view it. There's really no excuse for your ignorance here... and I don't wear a mask in spite of evidence like this because I have other concerns (effects of excessive CO2 inhalation, effects on general immunity not being exposed to pathogens).

1
Ih8leftists 1 point ago +2 / -1

You are saying that publication says that any cloth will filter sub micron sized virus particles?

Please copy and paste that part for me.

1
PM_ME_UR_MAGIC_CARDS 1 point ago +1 / -0

In conclusion, we have measured the filtration efficiencies of various commonly available fabrics for use as cloth masks in filtering particles in the significant (for aerosol-based virus transmission) size range of ∼10 nm to ∼6 μm and have presented filtration efficiency data as a function of aerosol particle size. We find that cotton, natural silk, and chiffon can provide good protection, typically above 50% in the entire 10 nm to 6.0 μm range, provided they have a tight weave. Higher threads per inch cotton with tighter weaves resulted in better filtration efficiencies.