construction pede here, haven't seen a contractor able to get their hands on n95 masks since this bullshit started because of faggots scared of the coof
meanwhile I'm stuck breathing in all kinds of shit that will give me lung cancer, thanks needle dicks i hate it
Funny how the idiots in charge of businesses are saying that valved masks are unacceptable, despite the fact that the highest quality respirators all have valves.
They're all in on the "my mask protects you" crap, so the valve defeats that narrative. Of course, if you don't catch it because you have an N95/100 with a valve (provided you actually want to wear a mask) you can't spread it, so it's stupid.
Yeah we haven't been able to get masks. Needed to cut some concrete and half the crew said fuck that shit. Hate skimping out on the job but my health>my job.
I told my foreman to eat a dick one time because he was under the impression that just because he doesn't want to hold his own grandchildren some day that none of the rest of us would want to hold our own grandchildren either.
Yeah I don't get people like that. Just about everything I do is to provide a good environment for my future children to do better than me. What motivates these people.
I'm an engineer who works in aerosol science. This is not true. Saliva droplets are huge compared to smoke aerosols, and masks are definitely effective at stopping droplets.
The problem with masks was never their effectiveness, it was that the CDC and every other health "professional" spent months lying about them. We were told that they weren't effective up until April, which was a known falsehood to anybody who works in this field. So of course there was then backlash when they turned around and started requiring them. But we should be better than spreading fake information like this picture.
If masks prevented China virus infection, then all prisoners would simply be required to wear a mask and kept in prison, instead of released.
The Demonrats want to release criminals on the street for ideological reasons. The chinavirus is just an excuse for them to do so directly and openly, instead of with Marxist judges.
There is a common misconception around mask efficiency. To understand it you have to learn a little bit about about filtration mechanisms. I've grabbed some pictures out of a reference book on my shelf, Aerosol Technology by William Hinds.
When air moves through filter media it flows smoothly around each individual filter fiber. So for an aerosol particle to be captured by the fiber it must deviate from the gas flow. There are two different mechanisms for this to happen. Capture of large particles is driven by impaction - which is when the inertia of large particles causes them to deviate from streamlines. On the other hand, capture of small particles is driven by diffusion. Small particles have significant brownian motion that causes them to not follow aerodynamic streamlines.
You might already see where I am going with this, but these competing mechanisms means that the most troublesome particles to filter are intermediate sized ones. Particles which are too large to have significant brownian motion, but too small to have their inertia carry them across aerodynamic streamlines. As it turns out, the intermediate size with the lowest filtration efficiency is 0.3 um. That is why filter media is rated by percentage efficiency at 0.3 um. Not because it becomes inefficient at smaller sizes, but because it is more efficient at all other sizes.
There are no virus containing aerosol particles small enough to completely defeat n95 masks. Viruses themselves get down to around 0.02 um. The project that I am currently managing at work is to aerosolize and measure size distributions of some (non-infective) viruses. Excess flow is filtered by a 0.3 um rated HEPA filter, and we have verified that it operates at >99.99 efficiency against our single-virus aerosols. n95 face masks are not that efficient, but they certainly do work to significantly cut down on viral transmission. Surgical face masks are less effective against small aerosols due to reduced diffusion efficiency, but they are still significantly effective against droplets.
To address your link: I looked through a few of the papers on that site, and their negative conclusions are largely behavioral. The website is misrepresenting the actual findings of the papers. Take this one for example. That review paper found that both n95 and surgical masks were effective at preventing the transmission of viral loads when somebody coughs. They also found that wearing either type of mask reduced person to person transmission when compliance with mask wearing was high. The studies with no effect from masks specifically cited lack of compliance as the contributing behavioral factor to reduced effectiveness. The findings of the papers linked on that website do not mesh with the website's analysis.
Not everybody who you disagree with is a shill. Every engineer who I work with, and most of the scientists, are also based AF. Technical people tend to be. But we also know that masks are effective, because we are out here making a living in aerosol science. I've been on TD since 2015 primary days, and the political discussion here is greater than anywhere else because Trump supporters actually know how to respectfully disagree with each other. Continue that tradition.
In catching a disease the viral load is critical. A mask stopping even only the 90% of the virus would make an enormous difference. You don't catch the disease for exposure to a single virus.
Correct. While the chinavirus itself is too small, a mask works by blocking the respiratory droplets that the virus travels on. These are generally bigger than 1 micron.
An N95 mask blocks the 95% of particles as small as 0.3 micron.
Importantly, it's a matter of viral load: blocking only the biggest droplets does make a big difference.
You are right about the importance of blocking big droplets, but I'd like to clarify about n95 masks. They are rated at 0.3 um because that is the hardest size particle to filter. They are actually more efficient at blocking particles smaller than that. See my other comment here for an explanation of that.
It makes sense but their basis for masks are studies like this that talk about Aerosols from breathing. So then saying wildfire pollutants are too small for masks to help is just another example of the "believe science" left turning into the "believe us" left
"Results: The exhaled aerosol particles are generated by normal breathing in the deep lung through reopening of collapsed small airways during inspiration. These mucus/surfactant aerosols (size range between 0.2 and 0.6 μm) can transport viruses out of the lungs of patients and be present in the room air for hours."
This is the key that people get wrong. All the "common sense" of "it should mitigate" is out the window when actual studies indicate it really doesn't. Either there isn't good understanding of how masks affect viral load or (my personal opinion) there are other factors like touching your face/mask isn't fitted properly, etc
...And here we have a recent, official NZ Government modelling paper talking about R number and risk of Coronavirus spread in NZ, which doesn't mention masks or attempt to calculate for their usage or incorporate that in to the metric generated, at all:
Before it was N95 at minimum (P100/N100 are actually what should be worn against most virii btw), cloth masks, including the shit masks that have the bendable metal at the nose, are only to catch (not block) your own spit as you speak from your mouth. They don't block anything below 10 micron. People only are wearing 'masks' because they are told to, otherwise here's a hefty monetary fine. All the stupid sheep think they're wearing masks because it protects them, and they're the ones that freak out that other people don't, outside, 5 meters/yards away from the next closest person.
Funny, I don't remember people going around coughing and sneezing on each other being an ok thing to do pre-corona. Masks don't prevent it because it's never been a thing.
Just food for thought. I work in the pharma industry. For biologics, you have to have a filtration step to remove potential virus contaminants from your product stream. To do this, generally you're using a nanofilter with pores around 0.01 micron.
Hey biologists over at the meme factory, this is nonsense. Viruses dont float freely they exist within cells. So the size of the cell is what's important, not the virus. Masks don't work. This aint why.
The idea is that infected people's aerosols carrying the virus will travel less distance if youre wearing a mask. The concept is fine, forcing people to wear one is not
I apologise for adding fuel to the false mask debate. I TAKE IT BACK. If you think masks work or don't 👍 it doesn't matter because it appears that slowing the spread just prolongs the chinaviris shit show.
Remember those pictures a few months ago from China of people supposedly dropping dead in the street from corona in Wuhan, that basically caused panic in the west and led to us damaging our economy? That was hilarious.
I am thinking that the people are waking up and being red pilled on this Kung Pow Sickens virus. They are starting to go against the narrative so the Socialist had to come up with another plan.
That plan is: Start a large fire and tell people that the smoke is dangerous for your health. Even if your house burns down, die inside because the smoke is bad for your health.
I know I will get downvotes for this but three of the closest people in my life died of the China virus. Cloths masks prevent the wearer from projecting saliva particles into the air. But if particles are already airborne, a cloth mask won’t stop you from inhaling them. It’s pretty simple to understand; catch the particles before they are airborne. Please wear a mask in public until this virus is kicked!
Detailed airborne measurements of smoke plumes from seven prescribed burns of forest biomass residues leftover from timber harvests in Washington and Oregon are described. Measurements of particle size distributions in the plumes at ≈3.3 km downwind of the burns showed a prominent peak in the mass concentration for particles ≈0.25-0.30 µm in diameter.
That's not really true; while 5 microns is the size of larger respiratory droplets, covid can be transmitted in smaller respiratory droplets as well, which are emitted upon sneezing, and range in size from 0.1-5 microns. Yes, that first number is 0.1 microns.
I’m not saying masks work against wuflu, but the way m95 masks work, they are good at catching small and large particles, but not medium ones. Simply pointing out that aerosol wuflu particles are smaller probably won’t work on social media because someone is bound to point out the above fact.
Then I would call you a RACIST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY THEORIST
He’s definitely racist. I’m reporting to the mods. If you aren’t wearing a mask and putting your fist up you’re a RACIST, BIGOT. and are UNEDUCATED!
LiterallyKaiserisoverparty
CANCELED
I'm reporting you for assuming someones gender. transphobe!
Well maybe if marklar put marklar’s pronouns in marklars bio I’d know!
(he/him)
agreed comrade
They're making the frogs gay!
You left out xenophobe, Hitler!!!!
Come on Man!!
Masks are like the TSA
stupid wins
construction pede here, haven't seen a contractor able to get their hands on n95 masks since this bullshit started because of faggots scared of the coof
meanwhile I'm stuck breathing in all kinds of shit that will give me lung cancer, thanks needle dicks i hate it
Buy a 3M half mask respirator with p100 pink filters. Make sure it's the reusable version with removable filters so you can replace them if needed.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/3M-6200-Half-Facepiece-Respirator-W-3M-2091-P1OO-Filter-Cartridge-Size-MEDIUM/154067681164?epid=1001619219&hash=item23df263f8c:g:cN8AAOSwtjdfKcf5
Funny how the idiots in charge of businesses are saying that valved masks are unacceptable, despite the fact that the highest quality respirators all have valves.
They're all in on the "my mask protects you" crap, so the valve defeats that narrative. Of course, if you don't catch it because you have an N95/100 with a valve (provided you actually want to wear a mask) you can't spread it, so it's stupid.
Yeah we haven't been able to get masks. Needed to cut some concrete and half the crew said fuck that shit. Hate skimping out on the job but my health>my job.
I told my foreman to eat a dick one time because he was under the impression that just because he doesn't want to hold his own grandchildren some day that none of the rest of us would want to hold our own grandchildren either.
safety first, last, always
Yeah I don't get people like that. Just about everything I do is to provide a good environment for my future children to do better than me. What motivates these people.
I'm an engineer who works in aerosol science. This is not true. Saliva droplets are huge compared to smoke aerosols, and masks are definitely effective at stopping droplets.
The problem with masks was never their effectiveness, it was that the CDC and every other health "professional" spent months lying about them. We were told that they weren't effective up until April, which was a known falsehood to anybody who works in this field. So of course there was then backlash when they turned around and started requiring them. But we should be better than spreading fake information like this picture.
Well, yeah it is about effectiveness:
https://aapsonline.org/mask-facts/
Just look at how ineffective they are.
The Demonrats want to release criminals on the street for ideological reasons. The chinavirus is just an excuse for them to do so directly and openly, instead of with Marxist judges.
Thank you for this
There is a common misconception around mask efficiency. To understand it you have to learn a little bit about about filtration mechanisms. I've grabbed some pictures out of a reference book on my shelf, Aerosol Technology by William Hinds.
When air moves through filter media it flows smoothly around each individual filter fiber. So for an aerosol particle to be captured by the fiber it must deviate from the gas flow. There are two different mechanisms for this to happen. Capture of large particles is driven by impaction - which is when the inertia of large particles causes them to deviate from streamlines. On the other hand, capture of small particles is driven by diffusion. Small particles have significant brownian motion that causes them to not follow aerodynamic streamlines.
You might already see where I am going with this, but these competing mechanisms means that the most troublesome particles to filter are intermediate sized ones. Particles which are too large to have significant brownian motion, but too small to have their inertia carry them across aerodynamic streamlines. As it turns out, the intermediate size with the lowest filtration efficiency is 0.3 um. That is why filter media is rated by percentage efficiency at 0.3 um. Not because it becomes inefficient at smaller sizes, but because it is more efficient at all other sizes.
There are no virus containing aerosol particles small enough to completely defeat n95 masks. Viruses themselves get down to around 0.02 um. The project that I am currently managing at work is to aerosolize and measure size distributions of some (non-infective) viruses. Excess flow is filtered by a 0.3 um rated HEPA filter, and we have verified that it operates at >99.99 efficiency against our single-virus aerosols. n95 face masks are not that efficient, but they certainly do work to significantly cut down on viral transmission. Surgical face masks are less effective against small aerosols due to reduced diffusion efficiency, but they are still significantly effective against droplets.
To address your link: I looked through a few of the papers on that site, and their negative conclusions are largely behavioral. The website is misrepresenting the actual findings of the papers. Take this one for example. That review paper found that both n95 and surgical masks were effective at preventing the transmission of viral loads when somebody coughs. They also found that wearing either type of mask reduced person to person transmission when compliance with mask wearing was high. The studies with no effect from masks specifically cited lack of compliance as the contributing behavioral factor to reduced effectiveness. The findings of the papers linked on that website do not mesh with the website's analysis.
Not everybody who you disagree with is a shill. Every engineer who I work with, and most of the scientists, are also based AF. Technical people tend to be. But we also know that masks are effective, because we are out here making a living in aerosol science. I've been on TD since 2015 primary days, and the political discussion here is greater than anywhere else because Trump supporters actually know how to respectfully disagree with each other. Continue that tradition.
This whole long post makes no sense.
In catching a disease the viral load is critical. A mask stopping even only the 90% of the virus would make an enormous difference. You don't catch the disease for exposure to a single virus.
Want to take a guess why they call it "n95"?
Correct. While the chinavirus itself is too small, a mask works by blocking the respiratory droplets that the virus travels on. These are generally bigger than 1 micron.
An N95 mask blocks the 95% of particles as small as 0.3 micron.
Importantly, it's a matter of viral load: blocking only the biggest droplets does make a big difference.
You are right about the importance of blocking big droplets, but I'd like to clarify about n95 masks. They are rated at 0.3 um because that is the hardest size particle to filter. They are actually more efficient at blocking particles smaller than that. See my other comment here for an explanation of that.
Thank you very much. I've saved your other post.
Common sense is not a Liberal strong suit...only fear and anger
Well, to be fair there's a lot more of tha bad shit in a fire than there is in your breath normally. But, yeah.
It makes sense but their basis for masks are studies like this that talk about Aerosols from breathing. So then saying wildfire pollutants are too small for masks to help is just another example of the "believe science" left turning into the "believe us" left
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/JAMP.2020.1616
"Results: The exhaled aerosol particles are generated by normal breathing in the deep lung through reopening of collapsed small airways during inspiration. These mucus/surfactant aerosols (size range between 0.2 and 0.6 μm) can transport viruses out of the lungs of patients and be present in the room air for hours."
Which makes all the studies that say that masks have zero effect on influenza infection rates all the more interesting.
That isn't transmission of disease.
I want to know if it changes the R number, which, it doesn't.
This is the key that people get wrong. All the "common sense" of "it should mitigate" is out the window when actual studies indicate it really doesn't. Either there isn't good understanding of how masks affect viral load or (my personal opinion) there are other factors like touching your face/mask isn't fitted properly, etc
...And here we have a recent, official NZ Government modelling paper talking about R number and risk of Coronavirus spread in NZ, which doesn't mention masks or attempt to calculate for their usage or incorporate that in to the metric generated, at all:
https://www.scribd.com/document/476186800/Government-Modelling-Paper-on-the-Auckland-Cluster
...It's almost like they don't even matter.
yeah 5 microns is way too big
They don't say it stop covid neither "to slow the spread" slowing how much? It's never said how much. Could be 1%. Could be 0.5%
Before it was N95 at minimum (P100/N100 are actually what should be worn against most virii btw), cloth masks, including the shit masks that have the bendable metal at the nose, are only to catch (not block) your own spit as you speak from your mouth. They don't block anything below 10 micron. People only are wearing 'masks' because they are told to, otherwise here's a hefty monetary fine. All the stupid sheep think they're wearing masks because it protects them, and they're the ones that freak out that other people don't, outside, 5 meters/yards away from the next closest person.
Many droplets are as big as 1mm (if you sneeze or cough) and these are the most dangerous because they contain the highest viral load.
Even if a mask doesn't block anything smaller than 10 micron it's still somewhat effective.
Funny, I don't remember people going around coughing and sneezing on each other being an ok thing to do pre-corona. Masks don't prevent it because it's never been a thing.
Just food for thought. I work in the pharma industry. For biologics, you have to have a filtration step to remove potential virus contaminants from your product stream. To do this, generally you're using a nanofilter with pores around 0.01 micron.
Well Golly.
Hey biologists over at the meme factory, this is nonsense. Viruses dont float freely they exist within cells. So the size of the cell is what's important, not the virus. Masks don't work. This aint why.
Easy to see who sheep are, they all wear masks.
The idea is that infected people's aerosols carrying the virus will travel less distance if youre wearing a mask. The concept is fine, forcing people to wear one is not
We have to get those fires to wear a mask. Duh.
What if I told you that influenza isn't considered spreadable by aerosols.......
I apologise for adding fuel to the false mask debate. I TAKE IT BACK. If you think masks work or don't 👍 it doesn't matter because it appears that slowing the spread just prolongs the chinaviris shit show.
Remember those pictures a few months ago from China of people supposedly dropping dead in the street from corona in Wuhan, that basically caused panic in the west and led to us damaging our economy? That was hilarious.
Again with this "stay inside BS".
I am thinking that the people are waking up and being red pilled on this Kung Pow Sickens virus. They are starting to go against the narrative so the Socialist had to come up with another plan.
That plan is: Start a large fire and tell people that the smoke is dangerous for your health. Even if your house burns down, die inside because the smoke is bad for your health.
I know I will get downvotes for this but three of the closest people in my life died of the China virus. Cloths masks prevent the wearer from projecting saliva particles into the air. But if particles are already airborne, a cloth mask won’t stop you from inhaling them. It’s pretty simple to understand; catch the particles before they are airborne. Please wear a mask in public until this virus is kicked!
Your source lies more than Joe Biden..
https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr251.pdf
EDIT: Removed naughty webpage and will instead quote OP's rediculous claim of 1 micron for a Covid aerosol.
Making a smoke particle 3 times SMALLER than a Covid Aerosol.
That's not really true; while 5 microns is the size of larger respiratory droplets, covid can be transmitted in smaller respiratory droplets as well, which are emitted upon sneezing, and range in size from 0.1-5 microns. Yes, that first number is 0.1 microns.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-38808-z
Edit: also, if you want to be taken seriously, please have better sources than a weird health supplements website.
I chose a website that is not likely to confuse an idiot. Seems I should have chosen a little bit better..
oh snap did i get told?
I notice none of you faggots seem to have issue with ≈0.25-0.30 µm smoke particle size instead of the claimed 5..
They've refuted the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service? sure they did.
Does it? What can you find for aerosol particle size when breathing and talking instead of sneezing?
I’m not saying masks work against wuflu, but the way m95 masks work, they are good at catching small and large particles, but not medium ones. Simply pointing out that aerosol wuflu particles are smaller probably won’t work on social media because someone is bound to point out the above fact.
Probably for the same reason they don't meaningfully prevent spread of flu according to the seven studies in this article: https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy