Post by: Ergel on March 31, 2020, 08:27:23 AM
Post by: israshot on March 31, 2020, 09:22:23 AM
Someone is selling KN-95 masks from China near me. 60 shekel for 2 or 100 shekel for 4. It says Naisian on them. Are they worth buying? If I have a beard, will they do anything for me? I think they said they are washable? Is there such a thing? Or are they single-use only?A mask is good only to protect others from yourself in case you're positive or with symptoms or just for precautions. To protect yourself from others you'll need more than that, especially if you have a beard.
(Talking about beard... https://www.ch10.co.il/news/583437/#.XoJBZOpvaUk )
Post by: CountValentine on March 31, 2020, 09:54:57 AM
A mask is good only to protect others from yourself in case you're positive or with symptoms or just for precautions. To protect yourself from others you'll need more than that, especially if you have a beard.Please don't post wrong information. An N95 mask will protect you. A surgical mask is to protect others.
(Talking about beard... https://www.ch10.co.il/news/583437/#.XoJBZOpvaUk )
Post by: Ergel on March 31, 2020, 09:58:01 AM
Please don't post wrong information. An N95 mask will protect you. A surgical mask is to protect others.Correct. But he said it authoritatively, so it must be true.
But on the other hand, it wasn't on WhatsApp so it might not be true.
Hmm...What to do?
Post by: Dan on March 31, 2020, 10:00:36 AM
Post by: yuneeq on March 31, 2020, 10:02:19 AM
Please don't post wrong information. An N95 mask will protect you. A surgical mask is to protect others.
Didn't see anyone mention N95 until your post. KN95 is not N95.
KN95 is Chinese standard and not equivalent.
Post by: CountValentine on March 31, 2020, 10:02:54 AM
Hmm...What to do?You willing to shave your beard?
Post by: CountValentine on March 31, 2020, 10:03:43 AM
Not sure how much N95 helps if you have facial hair.If you are referring to a beard you need to shave it.
Post by: CountValentine on March 31, 2020, 10:05:00 AM
Didn't see anyone mention N95 until your post. KN95 is not N95.I would not buy anything from China.
KN95 is Chinese standard and not equivalent.
Post by: aygart on March 31, 2020, 10:05:03 AM
http://psa.gov.in/sites/default/files/pdf/PSAManualonMasks_PIB_FINALpdf.pdf
Post by: Dan on March 31, 2020, 10:05:14 AM
If you are referring to a beard you need to shave it.Question is if you won't, does the N95 still give some level of protection?
Post by: CountValentine on March 31, 2020, 10:06:34 AM
Question is if you won't, does the N95 still give some level of protection?It still filters but nowhere near as well.
Post by: aygart on March 31, 2020, 10:10:14 AM
Question is if you won't, does the N95 still give some level of protection?Not less than a surgical mask.
Post by: Dan on March 31, 2020, 10:10:37 AM
Not less than a surgical mask.But is it more?
Post by: aygart on March 31, 2020, 10:11:31 AM
But is it more?I will speculate that it is slightly more since what goes through the mask itself is filtered better but not by a tremendous amount.
Post by: yuneeq on March 31, 2020, 10:17:13 AM
Post by: CountValentine on March 31, 2020, 10:19:53 AM
Question is if you won't, does the N95 still give some level of protection?Yes but how much I have no idea.
I had to wear respirator masks for many months. Even a perfectly fitted one is not 100%.
With a beard a fitted mask (N95) will still fit better than a surgical mask. It still filters better so based on that I would say yes but that is only a guess.
Post by: AsherO on March 31, 2020, 10:22:07 AM
Question is if you won't, does the N95 still give some level of protection?
What are bearded Hatzalah members wearing?
Post by: aygart on March 31, 2020, 10:32:25 AM
List of studies. Knock yourself out
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4pt4oFDBhsC_jpblXpNtQ/preview#
Post by: Ergel on March 31, 2020, 10:39:42 AM
Post by: AsherO on March 31, 2020, 10:41:26 AM
Wait, so what is KN-95 mask?
A gimmick?
Post by: Ergel on March 31, 2020, 10:43:37 AM
Post by: AsherO on March 31, 2020, 10:57:02 AM
https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1791500O/comparison-ffp2-kn95-n95-filtering-facepiece-respirator-classes-tb.pdf
Nice. So force applied being much higher for KN95 means what? That the mask is theoretically tighter but also much less comfortable?
Post by: how on March 31, 2020, 11:14:12 AM
A surgical mask is basically open from the entire top and sides and welcomes all airborne particles. N95 masks, even if poorly fitted, will be a much tighter fit around the face, and even if not sealed 100%, will significantly reduce airborne particles compared to surgical. IMHO.
Yes but how much I have no idea.So the reasoning is that a 3 ply mask is more porous so the air you breathe will come through the mask. An N95 is less porous so if there is any gap unfiltered air will come through that path of least resistance. So that's why a surgical mask may be better for a beard or if you were not fit tested. Many people still opt for the N95 and try to make sure it's tight but still, everything depends on the mask, beard person
I had to wear respirator masks for many months. Even a perfectly fitted one is not 100%.
With a beard a fitted mask (N95) will still fit better than a surgical mask. It still filters better so based on that I would say yes but that is only a guess.
If you do wear a mask make sure to wear it properly. Follow this link for instructions on how to properly wear and remove a face mask
&feature=youtu.
Post by: how on March 31, 2020, 11:17:31 AM
Wait, so what is KN-95 mask?Chinese version of an N95. very slight differences. Many countries have their own regulations. Similar to UL CE
Post by: Yammer on March 31, 2020, 02:14:00 PM
Didn't see anyone mention N95 until your post. KN95 is not N95.+1
KN95 is Chinese standard and not equivalent.
Wait, so what is KN-95 mask?Chinese.
There have been many KN95s that have lost FDA approvals over the last few days.
In fact it's not even being allowed into the country now.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kenbensinger/coronavirus-kn95-masks-us-wont-import-china
Post by: Ergel on March 31, 2020, 02:34:26 PM
Anyone know if the company is legit?
Post by: how on March 31, 2020, 04:04:05 PM
+1Chinese.Mine wasn’t stopped so YMMV
There have been many KN95s that have lost FDA approvals over the last few days.
In fact it's not even being allowed into the country now.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kenbensinger/coronavirus-kn95-masks-us-wont-import-china
Post by: israshot on April 07, 2020, 10:00:31 PM
$30 for 10 kn95
Post by: shimino1 on April 08, 2020, 05:41:11 AM
Post by: Definitions on April 20, 2020, 12:05:01 PM
Is there some sort of tape that I can use to close the gaps?
Post by: junion on April 20, 2020, 02:11:04 PM
A surgical mask is basically open from the entire top and sides and welcomes all airborne particles. N95 masks, even if poorly fitted, will be a much tighter fit around the face, and even if not sealed 100%, will significantly reduce airborne particles compared to surgical. IMHO.Wont a surgical mask help if someone sneezes near you (the big droplets wont go into your mouth/nose)
Post by: Luvisrael on April 20, 2020, 02:16:17 PM
[/youtube]
Post by: AsherO on April 20, 2020, 04:53:27 PM
Wont a surgical mask help if someone sneezes near you (the big droplets wont go into your mouth/nose)
The concern is that the droplets aerosolize and can get past a surgical mask. They aren’t sure how much of a concern this is.
Post by: Definitions on April 20, 2020, 07:22:18 PM
I followed all instructions but wasn't successful. I was successful previously with a mask that had this little foam piece by the nose[/youtube]
(https://i.ibb.co/4f97gPm/20200420-113349.jpg) (https://ibb.co/rtTmf47)
(https://i.ibb.co/gDNVFHc/20200420-113333.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Hr6dp19)
(https://i.ibb.co/9h1XjYq/20200419-020138.jpg) (https://ibb.co/w7PH16K)
Post by: Luvisrael on April 20, 2020, 07:24:40 PM
I followed all instructions but wasn't successful. I was successful previously with a mask that had this little foam piece by the nosethe N95 has that foam piece
(https://i.ibb.co/4f97gPm/20200420-113349.jpg) (https://ibb.co/rtTmf47)
(https://i.ibb.co/gDNVFHc/20200420-113333.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Hr6dp19)
(https://i.ibb.co/9h1XjYq/20200419-020138.jpg) (https://ibb.co/w7PH16K)
Post by: Thingywingy on April 20, 2020, 10:38:53 PM
Post by: Definitions on April 27, 2020, 09:09:04 PM
A trick I learned a few years ago is to take regular dish soap and smear a very thin layer onto the glasses (both sides). Let it dry then buff it out with a cloth/tissue until it's perfectly clear. This will prevent any fogging up until the soap gets washed off.
Works extremely well. Try putting your glasses in the freezer with soap on only one lens for a few minutes and take it out to see the full effect.
Thought I'd share in case anyone finds it helpful.
Post by: moko on April 27, 2020, 09:29:31 PM
Since I can't get the masks that I have to fit I use it even though it leaks. The issue is that my glasses fog up.Did you try having it sit higher on your nose? Often that's a mistake people make.
A trick I learned a few years ago is to take regular dish soap and smear a very thin layer onto the glasses (both sides). Let it dry then buff it out with a cloth/tissue until it's perfectly clear. This will prevent any fogging up until the soap gets washed off.
Works extremely well. Try putting your glasses in the freezer with soap on only one lens for a few minutes and take it out to see the full effect.
Thought I'd share in case anyone finds it helpful.
Post by: Luvisrael on April 27, 2020, 09:49:19 PM
Question is if you won't, does the N95 still give some level of protection?depends how well you pt it on, airtight etc. I noticed some times I can breathe just fine through it, some times I can barely catch my breath...
Post by: Definitions on April 27, 2020, 09:54:31 PM
Did you try having it sit higher on your nose? Often that's a mistake people make.I tried every position
Post by: Iz on April 29, 2020, 09:56:06 AM
Post by: yitzf on April 29, 2020, 10:42:10 AM
I'm looking for about 5 (simple) masks in Lakewood. What's my best option? Thanks.I saw in kosher village yesterday (10 packs)
Post by: bamo on April 29, 2020, 11:09:02 AM
I saw in kosher village yesterday (10 packs)
I know a medical supply company in lakewood sells them. 10 for $12 or 50/$50
Post by: Joel on April 29, 2020, 11:13:41 AM
I'm looking for about 5 (simple) masks in Lakewood. What's my best option? Thanks.Bingo
Post by: nucheiner on April 29, 2020, 12:12:10 PM
Post by: Iz on April 29, 2020, 12:13:11 PM
I saw in kosher village yesterday (10 packs)
I know a medical supply company in lakewood sells them. 10 for $12 or 50/$50
BingoThank you all, and thanks to the one who PMd me and took care of it for me. :)
Post by: Luvisrael on April 29, 2020, 02:52:21 PM
Post by: grodnoking on April 29, 2020, 02:57:19 PM
Post by: Onefishtwofishredfishblue on April 29, 2020, 03:17:44 PM
Post by: Luvisrael on April 29, 2020, 03:22:54 PM
Post by: Yehudaa on May 06, 2020, 04:48:23 PM
I never thought I'd be working on a sample mask that would fit everyone from the bearded man to the glasses wearers but here I am! Being back at work feels great. My team and I are back at work making masks for the time being to support our local community, pic.twitter.com/4GIeV2uU4h
— Yosel Tiefenbrun (@RabbiTailor) May 6, 2020
Post by: Iz on May 21, 2020, 02:23:31 PM
I'm looking for about 5 (simple) masks in Lakewood. What's my best option? Thanks.I need another 10 masks in Lakewood. Best option now?
Post by: Jellybelly on May 21, 2020, 03:07:39 PM
Post by: shie123 on May 21, 2020, 09:44:30 PM
Where can I get a good quality washable mask? How much should I expect to pay?I can sell you but not single.
Post by: israshot on May 25, 2020, 08:25:38 AM
Masks for bearded people!https://nypost.com/2020/05/22/nyc-tailors-300-bespoke-masks-are-flying-off-the-shelves/I never thought I'd be working on a sample mask that would fit everyone from the bearded man to the glasses wearers but here I am! Being back at work feels great. My team and I are back at work making masks for the time being to support our local community, pic.twitter.com/4GIeV2uU4h
— Yosel Tiefenbrun (@RabbiTailor) May 6, 2020
Post by: Mtrasb on June 01, 2020, 06:15:11 AM
Post by: avromie7 on June 01, 2020, 07:58:34 AM
Oh the politicization of it all!The author of the meme was probably saying the same thing.
Post by: etech0 on June 08, 2020, 08:48:53 PM
https://www.dansdeals.com/shopping-deals/2-pack-adults-childrens-fabric-reusable-face-masks-just-4-target/
are more breathable than the standard disposable ones?
Post by: aygart on June 12, 2020, 02:03:25 PM
Post by: Dan on June 12, 2020, 03:58:51 PM
Invalid Tweet IDEnglish version of the study? @biobook?
Post by: biobook on June 12, 2020, 04:45:20 PM
Post by: biobook on June 14, 2020, 06:03:48 PM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2020/06/13/face-masks-may-be-the-key-determinant-of-the-covid-19-curve-study-suggests/#44ac7f116497
Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19, by Renyi Zhang and others, PNAS, published June 11, 2020
Short summary: Why did COVID-19 stop spreading so much faster in China than in Italy and the US? And why did new cases plateau so much earlier in NYC than in the rest of the United States? In both cases, the authors conclude that the onset of mandated face coverings made the difference, preventing tens of thousands of infections.
Longer summary: In China, the early response to the outbreak was SD, masks, extensive testing, and contact tracing, all put into effect simultaneously. In China, the number of new cases increased for about 3 weeks after the lockdown, and had reached a plateau about a week after that.
In NYC and Italy, the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home, but masks were not required until a month had passed. In these places, the number of new cases increased rapidly for about 4 weeks after the early SD requirement, and began to decrease only later, after the face covering requirement was implemented.
In the rest of the US the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home and masks were not required, and the number of new cases were continuing to rise steeply (at the time they looked, May 9).
The timing of these events suggests that mask-wearing was critical in decreasing the spread of coronavirus, quickly in China and after a delay in NYC.
A second piece of evidence they bring is from plotting the total cases in NYC, using a statistical technique called linear regression. Their graph shows that if the original policy (SD, stay at home) had continued, the number of cases would have been much higher than it actually was. The pivot point occurred on April 17, when masks were first required, and the caseload started to decline.
Similarly, their comparison of new infections in NYC compared to the US as a whole (minus the NYC cases) shows that corona cases declined steeply after the April 17 mandated face covering, while new cases remained high during that time throughout the United States.
Why would masks have such a dramatic effect?
Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze. These droplets are pulled down by gravity, so are usually found within 3 feet of a sick person, so we were advised to stay away from an obviously sick person and to wash our hands and keep them away from our face to avoid transferring a virus-containing droplet to our mouth, nose or eyes. Masks were recommended only for the sick person themselves, to prevent their expelled droplets from contaminating others (WHO, April 6).
But later in April, scientists learned that there’s another way that virus can be expelled, in the form of much smaller particles, called aerosols, especially by people talking loudly or singing.
You can visualize the difference by spraying a window cleaner and an air freshener on a mirror. The window cleaner forms small droplets that soon start rolling down, attracted by gravity. The air freshener forms an aerosol of tiny drops that remain where they fell on the mirror. In fact, we spray air freshener into the air knowing that these miniscule particles – and their pleasant odor – will remain suspended in the air for quite some time.
The realization that viral particles were found in aerosols convinced the experts that the virus could be inhaled by someone who was more than 3 feet from an infected patient, or even in a room where an infected person had previously exhaled, and this led to expansion of the advice to wear masks:
• The knowingly infected should wear masks to avoid spreading their droplets and aerosols, which can contain virus.
• The unknowingly infected (that is, presymptomatic, when viral expulsion seems highest) should similarly wear masks to avoid spreading the virus.
• The healthy uninfected should wear masks to avoid inhaling the aerosols of the two previous groups.
They conclude that “wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracking, poses the most probably fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to the development of a vaccine.”
My comment:
Finding that the number of cases in NYC began to decrease around the same time as mask wearing was required is not sufficient to conclude that mask wearing was responsible for the decrease. Did people actually obey the mask-wearing regulation? Were there other events that occurred around that time that contributed to the decline in new infections? This paper provides evidence that mask-wearing is important, but it's weak evidence, and the argument could be strengthened by other research.
Post by: S209 on June 14, 2020, 06:47:41 PM
Well, Dan asked for a summary of the article that @aygart posted, but it's disappeared. And while I wrote a summary, this (better) summary with pictures has been published, but I'll paste mine anyway. Is this too long?You rock. Seriously.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2020/06/13/face-masks-may-be-the-key-determinant-of-the-covid-19-curve-study-suggests/#44ac7f116497
Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19, by Renyi Zhang and others, PNAS, published June 11, 2020
Short summary: Why did COVID-19 stop spreading so much faster in China than in Italy and the US? And why did new cases plateau so much earlier in NYC than in the rest of the United States? In both cases, the authors conclude that the onset of mandated face coverings made the difference, preventing tens of thousands of infections.
Longer summary: In China, the early response to the outbreak was SD, masks, extensive testing, and contact tracing, all put into effect simultaneously. In China, the number of new cases increased for about 3 weeks after the lockdown, and had reached a plateau about a week after that.
In NYC and Italy, the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home, but masks were not required until a month had passed. In these places, the number of new cases increased rapidly for about 4 weeks after the early SD requirement, and began to decrease only later, after the face covering requirement was implemented.
In the rest of the US the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home and masks were not required, and the number of new cases were continuing to rise steeply (at the time they looked, May 9).
The timing of these events suggests that mask-wearing was critical in decreasing the spread of coronavirus, quickly in China and after a delay in NYC.
A second piece of evidence they bring is from plotting the total cases in NYC, using a statistical technique called linear regression. Their graph shows that if the original policy (SD, stay at home) had continued, the number of cases would have been much higher than it actually was. The pivot point occurred on April 17, when masks were first required, and the caseload started to decline.
Similarly, their comparison of new infections in NYC compared to the US as a whole (minus the NYC cases) shows that corona cases declined steeply after the April 17 mandated face covering, while new cases remained high during that time throughout the United States.
Why would masks have such a dramatic effect?
Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze. These droplets are pulled down by gravity, so are usually found within 3 feet of a sick person, so we were advised to stay away from an obviously sick person and to wash our hands and keep them away from our face to avoid transferring a virus-containing droplet to our mouth, nose or eyes. Masks were recommended only for the sick person themselves, to prevent their expelled droplets from contaminating others (WHO, April 6).
But later in April, scientists learned that there’s another way that virus can be expelled, in the form of much smaller particles, called aerosols, especially by people talking loudly or singing.
You can visualize the difference by spraying a window cleaner and an air freshener on a mirror. The window cleaner forms small droplets that soon start rolling down, attracted by gravity. The air freshener forms an aerosol of tiny drops that remain where they fell on the mirror. In fact, we spray air freshener into the air knowing that these miniscule particles – and their pleasant odor – will remain suspended in the air for quite some time.
The realization that viral particles were found in aerosols convinced the experts that the virus could be inhaled by someone who was more than 3 feet from an infected patient, or even in a room where an infected person had previously exhaled, and this led to expansion of the advice to wear masks:
• The knowingly infected should wear masks to avoid spreading their droplets and aerosols, which can contain virus.
• The unknowingly infected (that is, presymptomatic, when viral expulsion seems highest) should similarly wear masks to avoid spreading the virus.
• The healthy uninfected should wear masks to avoid inhaling the aerosols of the two previous groups.
They conclude that “wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracking, poses the most probably fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to the development of a vaccine.”
My comment:
Finding that the number of cases in NYC began to decrease around the same time as mask wearing was required is not sufficient to conclude that mask wearing was responsible for the decrease. Did people actually obey the mask-wearing regulation? Were there other events that occurred around that time that contributed to the decline in new infections? This paper provides evidence that mask-wearing is important, but it's weak evidence, and the argument could be strengthened by other research.
Post by: biobook on June 14, 2020, 07:15:31 PM
Post by: ExGingi on June 14, 2020, 07:25:51 PM
My comment:
Finding that the number of cases in NYC began to decrease around the same time as mask wearing was required is not sufficient to conclude that mask wearing was responsible for the decrease. Did people actually obey the mask-wearing regulation? Were there other events that occurred around that time that contributed to the decline in new infections? This paper provides evidence that mask-wearing is important, but it's weak evidence, and the argument could be strengthened by other research.
Excellent comment. If I may, I'd like to offer an abbreviated version: Correlation does not prove causation!
(Side note: I almost puked several times hearing Cuomo's arrogant causation claims today, coupled with his muscle flexing.)
Post by: biobook on June 14, 2020, 07:45:44 PM
Excellent comment. If I may, I'd like to offer an abbreviated version: Correlation does not prove causation!
(Side note: I almost puked several times hearing Cuomo's arrogant causation claims today, coupled with his muscle flexing.)
Right! But correlation does not disprove causation either. It's just a hint, needs to be followed up.
Post by: gozalim on June 14, 2020, 07:50:27 PM
the viable route forward is more masks less lockdowns. overall less pain to the economy and even the individual living their lives.
or as another article put it, if we evaluate the various measures as ROI closing businesses may be high cost/low return, closing schools may be high return but high cost and universal masking/sanitizing along with closing major events (1000s of people) are our most low cost/high return.
the emerging evidence on airborne vs touching etc. only confirms this
Post by: ari3 on June 14, 2020, 09:30:19 PM
My comment:Good point (and nice summary BTW)
Finding that the number of cases in NYC began to decrease around the same time as mask wearing was required is not sufficient to conclude that mask wearing was responsible for the decrease. Did people actually obey the mask-wearing regulation? Were there other events that occurred around that time that contributed to the decline in new infections? This paper provides evidence that mask-wearing is important, but it's weak evidence, and the argument could be strengthened by other research.
In NY mask compliance in subways and on the street was never great (i'm not in NY but commenting based on the news reports at the time). In NJ they never required masks other than in stores. Is there evidence that they took longer to bend the curve?
The states that still had cases rising were most likely to lax lockdowns in general not because of masks specifically.
China may have stopped the spread quicker because they did a much stricter lockdown then we did.
Post by: avromie7 on June 14, 2020, 10:05:26 PM
Well, Dan asked for a summary of the article that @aygart posted, but it's disappeared. And while I wrote a summary, this (better) summary with pictures has been published, but I'll paste mine anyway. Is this too long?Looking at graph A in this image from the article, I would conclude that the number of cases increased for 3 weeks after the stay at home order before starting to descend and continuing to descend for many weeks after with the face mask requirement having no effect. Including the 3 weeks of increase as part of the downward trend is a scam.(https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5ee52ec5ec3cd10007fe3734/960x0.jpg?fit=scale)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2020/06/13/face-masks-may-be-the-key-determinant-of-the-covid-19-curve-study-suggests/#44ac7f116497
Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19, by Renyi Zhang and others, PNAS, published June 11, 2020
Short summary: Why did COVID-19 stop spreading so much faster in China than in Italy and the US? And why did new cases plateau so much earlier in NYC than in the rest of the United States? In both cases, the authors conclude that the onset of mandated face coverings made the difference, preventing tens of thousands of infections.
Longer summary: In China, the early response to the outbreak was SD, masks, extensive testing, and contact tracing, all put into effect simultaneously. In China, the number of new cases increased for about 3 weeks after the lockdown, and had reached a plateau about a week after that.
In NYC and Italy, the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home, but masks were not required until a month had passed. In these places, the number of new cases increased rapidly for about 4 weeks after the early SD requirement, and began to decrease only later, after the face covering requirement was implemented.
In the rest of the US the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home and masks were not required, and the number of new cases were continuing to rise steeply (at the time they looked, May 9).
The timing of these events suggests that mask-wearing was critical in decreasing the spread of coronavirus, quickly in China and after a delay in NYC.
A second piece of evidence they bring is from plotting the total cases in NYC, using a statistical technique called linear regression. Their graph shows that if the original policy (SD, stay at home) had continued, the number of cases would have been much higher than it actually was. The pivot point occurred on April 17, when masks were first required, and the caseload started to decline.
Similarly, their comparison of new infections in NYC compared to the US as a whole (minus the NYC cases) shows that corona cases declined steeply after the April 17 mandated face covering, while new cases remained high during that time throughout the United States.
Why would masks have such a dramatic effect?
Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze. These droplets are pulled down by gravity, so are usually found within 3 feet of a sick person, so we were advised to stay away from an obviously sick person and to wash our hands and keep them away from our face to avoid transferring a virus-containing droplet to our mouth, nose or eyes. Masks were recommended only for the sick person themselves, to prevent their expelled droplets from contaminating others (WHO, April 6).
But later in April, scientists learned that there’s another way that virus can be expelled, in the form of much smaller particles, called aerosols, especially by people talking loudly or singing.
You can visualize the difference by spraying a window cleaner and an air freshener on a mirror. The window cleaner forms small droplets that soon start rolling down, attracted by gravity. The air freshener forms an aerosol of tiny drops that remain where they fell on the mirror. In fact, we spray air freshener into the air knowing that these miniscule particles – and their pleasant odor – will remain suspended in the air for quite some time.
The realization that viral particles were found in aerosols convinced the experts that the virus could be inhaled by someone who was more than 3 feet from an infected patient, or even in a room where an infected person had previously exhaled, and this led to expansion of the advice to wear masks:
• The knowingly infected should wear masks to avoid spreading their droplets and aerosols, which can contain virus.
• The unknowingly infected (that is, presymptomatic, when viral expulsion seems highest) should similarly wear masks to avoid spreading the virus.
• The healthy uninfected should wear masks to avoid inhaling the aerosols of the two previous groups.
They conclude that “wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracking, poses the most probably fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to the development of a vaccine.”
My comment:
Finding that the number of cases in NYC began to decrease around the same time as mask wearing was required is not sufficient to conclude that mask wearing was responsible for the decrease. Did people actually obey the mask-wearing regulation? Were there other events that occurred around that time that contributed to the decline in new infections? This paper provides evidence that mask-wearing is important, but it's weak evidence, and the argument could be strengthened by other research.
Post by: biobook on June 15, 2020, 11:13:58 AM
Looking at graph A in this image from the article, I would conclude that the number of cases increased for 3 weeks after the stay at home order before starting to descend and continuing to descend for many weeks after with the face mask requirement having no effect. Including the 3 weeks of increase as part of the downward trend is a scam.@avromie7 If you're saying what I think you're saying, then I agree with you 100%.
These scientists asked "Do case numbers change after masks were required?" so they drew two dotted lines, one that best fit their data before masks - when cases were only slightly declining - and one line after masks - which show a more dramatic decrease in cases. (first graph A)
But you come and say "Hey, wait a minute, guys! There's another way to analyze this! Instead of starting with the assumption that masks make a difference, just take a look at your data!" and you would draw two lines that show that cases increased for a few weeks until April 12, and then started to decline before masks were required!
I would add: If masks made the critical difference, then new infections should have decreased immediately, but new cases wouldn't have been reported until several days later when symptoms appear. So we would have expected the decline in reported new cases to begin a week after face covering began, not immediately.
So all of this is why it should be considered only "weak evidence", which is consistent with the importance of masking. We'd have a much more convincing argument if it had been decreed that masks had to be worn in Italy but were forbidden in the US, and then we would have had a clearer case for concluding whether or not masks were important. But obviously we can't do that kind of experiment, and are stuck with the data we have. As more data analysis is added, we'll get better conclusions, rather than relying on just this paper.
The only part of your comment that I disagree with is calling this "a scam", which implies intentional fraud. The Forbes journalist wasn't as astute as you, and didn't notice the problem with their analysis, but experts in epidemiology surely would have. (Note that the scientists who did this were actually chemists.) This is the kind of dispute that always happens as scientists try to reach agreement, and the conflict is usually resolved when additional data either supports or refutes it.
Post by: junion on June 15, 2020, 12:37:15 PM
Post by: avromie7 on June 15, 2020, 01:27:04 PM
The only part of your comment that I disagree with is calling this "a scam", which implies intentional fraud. The Forbes journalist wasn't as astute as you, and didn't notice the problem with their analysis, but experts in epidemiology surely would have. (Note that the scientists who did this were actually chemists.) This is the kind of dispute that always happens as scientists try to reach agreement, and the conflict is usually resolved when additional data either supports or refutes it.I don't know who deserves the blame and who should be given the benefit of the doubt that they're just "passing on" the information they received, but someone published something that is fatally flawed to the point that a layman like me glancing thru the article says something doesn't make sense. I can compare the week before the mask requirement to the weeks after and you'll see the downward trend slowed when masks were required.
I would think that cases would take a while (more than a week, likely 2 or 3) to start going down after the correct procedures were put in place. We have to remember that people only would get tested after a couple of days with symptoms and the results come back a few days later. Also family members would likely get it if they stayed at home with a sick person as no one was socially distancing or wearing masks around family members unless they had symptoms which was usually to late to stop transmission between family members. This suports the theory that stay at home orders is what really slowed it down.Alternatively, it has nothing to do with the stay at home order, rather when people decided to stay home (which actually happened a few days before the stay at home order) and there was no need for government involvement.
Post by: biobook on June 16, 2020, 12:05:40 AM
I would think that cases would take a while (more than a week, likely 2 or 3) to start going down after the correct procedures were put in place. We have to remember that people only would get tested after a couple of days with symptoms and the results come back a few days later. Also family members would likely get it if they stayed at home with a sick person as no one was socially distancing or wearing masks around family members unless they had symptoms which was usually to late to stop transmission between family members. This suports the theory that stay at home orders is what really slowed it down.Stay-at-home occurred in NYC and rest of the country, and the flattening of the curve is seen in both (A and B in the graph avromie7 posted) but mask-wearing had only been implemented in NY, and the steep decline is shown only in NYC (A, not B). It is difficult to disentangle how much each contributed, just from looking at these graphs.
Post by: biobook on June 16, 2020, 12:19:50 AM
I don't know who deserves the blame and who should be given the benefit of the doubt that they're just "passing on" the information they received, but someone published something that is fatally flawed to the point that a layman like me glancing thru the article says something doesn't make sense.It's not fatally flawed. The authors interpreted it one way, and you (admirably) found another way to interpret it. You should always be reading this way, asking "what did you base your conclusions on?" and "is there another interpretation for your data?"
Quote
Alternatively, it has nothing to do with the stay at home order, rather when people decided to stay home (which actually happened a few days before the stay at home order) and there was no need for government involvement.It's true that another problem with this study is that they don't know how people behaved -did they actually stay home when the government required it, did they wear masks, etc.
There was no need for the government to tell me to stay home, and no need to tell you to stay home. But you know that fool who lives on the next block over...? I'm glad the government told him to stay home.
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 16, 2020, 12:23:42 AM
It's not fatally flawed. The authors interpreted it one way, and you (admirably) found another way to interpret it. You should always be reading this way, asking "what did you base your conclusions on?" and "is there another interpretation for your data?"Sadly many of the fools down the block did not listen and many who stayed home on their own are still not going out.
It's true that another problem with this study is that they don't know how people behaved -did they actually stay home when the government required it, did they wear masks, etc.
There was no need for the government to tell me to stay home, and no need to tell you to stay home. But you know that fool who lives on the next block over...? I'm glad the government told him to stay home.
Based entirely on what I am seeing in my community, it seems people made their own decisions and stuck with them nothing to do with govt regulations.
Post by: junion on June 16, 2020, 08:33:22 AM
Stay-at-home occurred in NYC and rest of the country, and the flattening of the curve is seen in both (A and B in the graph avromie7 posted) but mask-wearing had only been implemented in NY, and the steep decline is shown only in NYC (A, not B). It is difficult to disentangle how much each contributed, just from looking at these graphs.You mean to tell me that only people in NY were wearing masks. I dont think that is true. Perhaps, the reason why it kept on going up outside of NY was because people were less cautious as it wasn't going around much there.
Post by: S209 on June 16, 2020, 08:44:23 AM
Sadly many of the fools down the block did not listen and many who stayed home on their own are still not going out.You obviously live in a community very different than mine. In my community almost no schools closed until they were forced to by the government, barely anyone wore masks in stores until they were mandated, few even heard of the concept of social distancing until it was required, etc.
Based entirely on what I am seeing in my community, it seems people made their own decisions and stuck with them nothing to do with govt regulations.
Post by: yuneeq on June 17, 2020, 08:58:56 AM
Well, Dan asked for a summary of the article that @aygart posted, but it's disappeared. And while I wrote a summary, this (better) summary with pictures has been published, but I'll paste mine anyway. Is this too long?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2020/06/13/face-masks-may-be-the-key-determinant-of-the-covid-19-curve-study-suggests/#44ac7f116497
Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19, by Renyi Zhang and others, PNAS, published June 11, 2020
Short summary: Why did COVID-19 stop spreading so much faster in China than in Italy and the US? And why did new cases plateau so much earlier in NYC than in the rest of the United States? In both cases, the authors conclude that the onset of mandated face coverings made the difference, preventing tens of thousands of infections.
Longer summary: In China, the early response to the outbreak was SD, masks, extensive testing, and contact tracing, all put into effect simultaneously. In China, the number of new cases increased for about 3 weeks after the lockdown, and had reached a plateau about a week after that.
In NYC and Italy, the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home, but masks were not required until a month had passed. In these places, the number of new cases increased rapidly for about 4 weeks after the early SD requirement, and began to decrease only later, after the face covering requirement was implemented.
In the rest of the US the early response was hand washing, SD, stay-at-home and masks were not required, and the number of new cases were continuing to rise steeply (at the time they looked, May 9).
The timing of these events suggests that mask-wearing was critical in decreasing the spread of coronavirus, quickly in China and after a delay in NYC.
A second piece of evidence they bring is from plotting the total cases in NYC, using a statistical technique called linear regression. Their graph shows that if the original policy (SD, stay at home) had continued, the number of cases would have been much higher than it actually was. The pivot point occurred on April 17, when masks were first required, and the caseload started to decline.
Similarly, their comparison of new infections in NYC compared to the US as a whole (minus the NYC cases) shows that corona cases declined steeply after the April 17 mandated face covering, while new cases remained high during that time throughout the United States.
Why would masks have such a dramatic effect?
Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze. These droplets are pulled down by gravity, so are usually found within 3 feet of a sick person, so we were advised to stay away from an obviously sick person and to wash our hands and keep them away from our face to avoid transferring a virus-containing droplet to our mouth, nose or eyes. Masks were recommended only for the sick person themselves, to prevent their expelled droplets from contaminating others (WHO, April 6).
But later in April, scientists learned that there’s another way that virus can be expelled, in the form of much smaller particles, called aerosols, especially by people talking loudly or singing.
You can visualize the difference by spraying a window cleaner and an air freshener on a mirror. The window cleaner forms small droplets that soon start rolling down, attracted by gravity. The air freshener forms an aerosol of tiny drops that remain where they fell on the mirror. In fact, we spray air freshener into the air knowing that these miniscule particles – and their pleasant odor – will remain suspended in the air for quite some time.
The realization that viral particles were found in aerosols convinced the experts that the virus could be inhaled by someone who was more than 3 feet from an infected patient, or even in a room where an infected person had previously exhaled, and this led to expansion of the advice to wear masks:
• The knowingly infected should wear masks to avoid spreading their droplets and aerosols, which can contain virus.
• The unknowingly infected (that is, presymptomatic, when viral expulsion seems highest) should similarly wear masks to avoid spreading the virus.
• The healthy uninfected should wear masks to avoid inhaling the aerosols of the two previous groups.
They conclude that “wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracking, poses the most probably fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to the development of a vaccine.”
My comment:
Finding that the number of cases in NYC began to decrease around the same time as mask wearing was required is not sufficient to conclude that mask wearing was responsible for the decrease. Did people actually obey the mask-wearing regulation? Were there other events that occurred around that time that contributed to the decline in new infections? This paper provides evidence that mask-wearing is important, but it's weak evidence, and the argument could be strengthened by other research.
So much fake news in this “research” even if I want to agree with the premise.
Masks were never required in NYC. Aerosolized spread was known from February, not April. Couldn’t read further.
Edit- Apparently mask coverings were mandated in NY but not in all situations. My mistake.
Post by: biobook on June 17, 2020, 02:47:51 PM
Masks were never required in NYC.Yes, at least according to the article, "All New Yorkers were mandated to use face covering in public starting on April 17, when social distancing was not possible."
Edit- Apparently mask coverings were mandated in NY but not in all situations. My mistake.
Aerosolized spread was known from February, not April.Again, from the article: "Recent experimental studies have examined the stability of SARS-CoV-2, showing that the virus remains infectious in aerosols for hours (12)" Reference (12) (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2004973) was published in the April 16 issue of NEJM, though online March 17.
So much fake news in this “research” even if I want to agree with the premise.I would call it "weak evidence" (and did, in the last line). "Fake news" seems to imply deliberate misinformation, which was not my intention, and probably not the authors' either.
... Couldn’t read further.
Post by: yuneeq on June 17, 2020, 06:41:02 PM
Again, from the article: "Recent experimental studies have examined the stability of SARS-CoV-2, showing that the virus remains infectious in aerosols for hours (12)" Reference (12) (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2004973) was published in the April 16 issue of NEJM, though online March 17.
I don't care if they didn't read about it until June, this was already known in February.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-21/how-the-novel-coronavirus-can-maybe-infect-you-quicktake
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-covid-19-is-spread-67143
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1180116.shtml
The arrogance of American researchers is astonishing, judging by the amount of "new discoveries" for things we already knew about for months (or years, in the case of masks). Puts into perspective how useless most of their COVID research is when they are always 2-3 months behind.
Post by: biobook on June 18, 2020, 02:29:43 AM
I don't care if they didn't read about it until June, this was already known in February.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-21/how-the-novel-coronavirus-can-maybe-infect-you-quicktake
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-covid-19-is-spread-67143
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1180116.shtml
The arrogance of American researchers is astonishing, judging by the amount of "new discoveries" for things we already knew about for months (or years, in the case of masks). Puts into perspective how useless most of their COVID research is when they are always 2-3 months behind.
I gotta hand it to you, @yuneeq! How do you keep up with this? I can barely keep track of the papers I read last week, let alone remember what happened in February.
I suspect that you and I agree that (a) masks may be helpful, (b) this paper doesn't add much, and (c) it isn't worth discussing further.
I'll just take a moment to point out why the researchers said that aerosol transmission was shown in April, while you "knew" it in February. It's because scientists prefer to cite a published paper, rather than the sources you listed.
Feb 19. Global Times.
China’s health agency says that aerosol transmission occurs, based on a statement by a health official at a press conference. No data or explanation was given, nothing in writing.
Feb 21. The Scientist
The article says that aerosolized transmission “was discussed by a Shanghai official in early February”, so this might be referring to the above report, but then quotes an Australian virologist who says that there's no evidence that aerosols spread covid.
Feb 20. Bloomberg
This quotes a WHO report saying aerosol transmission “can be envisaged” as occurring during certain medical procedures, and should be studied further. No data to show it occurs.
March 17. NEJM online
April 16. NEJM
This is the reference [12] cited in the article I reviewed, that showed coronavirus in aerosol, and seems to be the first published research.
after March/April Bloomberg, update to Feb 20 article
This page currently says “Researchers who aerosolized it intentionally found active virus can float in the air for as long as 3 hours.”, and links to the NEJM April article, so this sentence could not have been in the Feb 20 version.
Of course, many people had read the earlier news articles, and it was being discussed and even acted upon in February. But scientists have long used the date of publication as "discovery" date, so attributing the discovery of aerosolized transmission to March/April seems appropriate.
Post by: yuneeq on June 18, 2020, 11:28:43 AM
I gotta hand it to you, @yuneeq! How do you keep up with this? I can barely keep track of the papers I read last week, let alone remember what happened in February.
I suspect that you and I agree that (a) masks may be helpful, (b) this paper doesn't add much, and (c) it isn't worth discussing further.
I'll just take a moment to point out why the researchers said that aerosol transmission was shown in April, while you "knew" it in February. It's because scientists prefer to cite a published paper, rather than the sources you listed.
Feb 19. Global Times.
China’s health agency says that aerosol transmission occurs, based on a statement by a health official at a press conference. No data or explanation was given, nothing in writing.
Feb 21. The Scientist
The article says that aerosolized transmission “was discussed by a Shanghai official in early February”, so this might be referring to the above report, but then quotes an Australian virologist who says that there's no evidence that aerosols spread covid.
Feb 20. Bloomberg
This quotes a WHO report saying aerosol transmission “can be envisaged” as occurring during certain medical procedures, and should be studied further. No data to show it occurs.
March 17. NEJM online
April 16. NEJM
This is the reference [12] cited in the article I reviewed, that showed coronavirus in aerosol, and seems to be the first published research.
after March/April Bloomberg, update to Feb 20 article
This page currently says “Researchers who aerosolized it intentionally found active virus can float in the air for as long as 3 hours.”, and links to the NEJM April article, so this sentence could not have been in the Feb 20 version.
Of course, many people had read the earlier news articles, and it was being discussed and even acted upon in February. But scientists have long used the date of publication as "discovery" date, so attributing the discovery of aerosolized transmission to March/April seems appropriate.
I don’t know if I can I find an actual study before that March study, but you’re missing the point.
“Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze.”
If they were confident that COVID only spread via droplets until then, then they are literally complete idiots. The info coming from China and elsewhere strongly suggested that aerosolized transmission was probable if not factual. Remember this info was coming from China, which famously denied that COVID spreads human to human a month earlier. There’s reason to believe anything negative about COVID that is coming from the Chinese, at the very least to entertain the option. Not to even entertain the option until you have a peer reviewed study published is either complete arrogance or lack of intelligence.
Post by: PlatinumGuy on June 18, 2020, 12:22:19 PM
I don’t know if I can I find an actual study before that March study, but you’re missing the point.I don't think that's factually correct. They said it's not proven one way or the other.
“Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze.”
If they were confident that COVID only spread via droplets until then, then they are literally complete idiots. The info coming from China and elsewhere strongly suggested that aerosolized transmission was probable if not factual. Remember this info was coming from China, which famously denied that COVID spreads human to human a month earlier. There’s reason to believe anything negative about COVID that is coming from the Chinese, at the very least to entertain the option. Not to even entertain the option until you have a peer reviewed study published is either complete arrogance or lack of intelligence.
Post by: biobook on June 18, 2020, 02:57:01 PM
I don’t know if I can I find an actual study before that March study, but you’re missing the point.Multiple things going on here - What actually happened, What the authors said happened, What I wrote about it... and here I'll take credit for the idiocy, because I see that my amateur writing was misleading.
“Back in March, experts thought that the virus is communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze.”
If they were confident that COVID only spread via droplets until then, then they are literally complete idiots. The info coming from China and elsewhere strongly suggested that aerosolized transmission was probable if not factual. Remember this info was coming from China, which famously denied that COVID spreads human to human a month earlier. There’s reason to believe anything negative about COVID that is coming from the Chinese, at the very least to entertain the option. Not to even entertain the option until you have a peer reviewed study published is either complete arrogance or lack of intelligence.
I think I get your point now. Is this better?
- Initially, experts thought that the virus would be like measles, communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze. But mid-February, info from China suggested that aerosolized transmission could also occur. Shocked and horrified, scientists raced to investigate this, and soon confirmed that active virus could be found in aerosols, both in artificial aerosols created in the lab, and in air samples from hospital rooms where covid patients had stayed. This eventually led to a greater emphasis on the importance of mask-wearing. (For details of their study, see their NEJM article, publication date April, though published online on March 17, and certainly discussed among health professionals even earlier.)
Post by: yuneeq on June 18, 2020, 10:53:15 PM
Multiple things going on here - What actually happened, What the authors said happened, What I wrote about it... and here I'll take credit for the idiocy, because I see that my amateur writing was misleading.
I think I get your point now. Is this better?Initially, experts thought that the virus would be like measles, communicated by droplets that we expel when we cough or sneeze. But mid-February, info from China suggested that aerosolized transmission could also occur. Shocked and horrified, scientists raced to investigate this, and soon confirmed that active virus could be found in aerosols, both in artificial aerosols created in the lab, and in air samples from hospital rooms where covid patients had stayed. This eventually led to a greater emphasis on the importance of mask-wearing. (For details of their study, see their NEJM article, publication date April, though published online on March 17, and certainly discussed among health professionals even earlier.)
Not looking to argue, but regarding one point of yours - measles is actually airborne. Re: COVID - I originally understood that it is aerosolized but not necessarily airborne, but now I'm seeing some research that equates aerosolized spread with airborne spread. I understood the difference that an aerosol is a small droplet that can linger around for a few seconds, light enough to float with an air draft and spread to another side of the room. And airborne would be a microscopic droplet that can basically last for a couple hours in mid air.
If you're bored, read this article and come out more confused than when you started: https://first10em.com/aerosols-droplets-and-airborne-spread/
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 12:39:20 PM
Post by: Euclid on June 22, 2020, 12:54:06 PM
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out-the-ooze/202006/why-face-masks-give-us-the-creepsA good reason to be using a face shield instead. Facial expressions, lip reading, and beards are all non issues.
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 01:17:34 PM
A good reason to be using a face shield instead. Facial expressions, lip reading, and beards are all non issues.
I've said that from the outset.
Post by: Euclid on June 22, 2020, 01:18:57 PM
I've said that from the outset.Do you think they'd be more accepted in places where people are being heckled for wearing them?
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 01:48:25 PM
Do you think they'd be more accepted in places where people are being heckled for wearing them?I have no clue. I can see no justification for heckling people who wear masks.
ETA: My gut feeling is that the most common emotion towards those wearing a mask is pitty on them that they haven't had COVID-19 and recovered. Definitely no reason to heckle. Though at this point I feel terrible for not testing positive for COVID-19, as that would have allowed me to visit EY without quarantine. My positive IgG antibody test doesn't help.
Post by: yuneeq on June 22, 2020, 02:14:17 PM
A good reason to be using a face shield instead. Facial expressions, lip reading, and beards are all non issues.
I've said that from the outset.
Face shields are most useful in addition to wearing a mask, not instead of. There isn't great protection from aerosolized droplets with just a face shield, face shields are used to give fluid protection.
Post by: S209 on June 22, 2020, 02:15:16 PM
Face shields are most useful in addition to wearing a mask, not instead of. There isn't great protection from aerosolized droplets with just a face shield, face shields are used to give fluid protection.Beat me to it
Post by: Euclid on June 22, 2020, 02:22:45 PM
Face shields are most useful in addition to wearing a mask, not instead of. There isn't great protection from aerosolized droplets with just a face shield, face shields are used to give fluid protection.Is the risk from real aeroslized droplets that can float under a face shield high, according to current understanding?
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 02:31:52 PM
Face shields are most useful in addition to wearing a mask, not instead of. There isn't great protection from aerosolized droplets with just a face shield, face shields are used to give fluid protection.
So are you saying that if an infected person wearing a face shield sings, sneezes or coughs, the aerosol droplets fly towards the shield, take a turn downward when they realize the shield is there, escape, and then float back upward once they clear the shield? That's truly amazing!
Post by: Lurker on June 22, 2020, 02:37:34 PM
So are you saying that if an infected person wearing a face shield sings, sneezes or coughs, the aerosol droplets fly towards the shield, take a turn downward when they realize the shield is there, escape, and then float back upward once they clear the shield? That's truly amazing!
Try it. Put some food coloring and water into a spray bottle, lay out a white sheet in a room with the same expected air movement, spray it at a shield, and see where the droplets end up.
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 02:51:15 PM
Try it. Put some food coloring and water into a spray bottle, lay out a white sheet in a room with the same expected air movement, spray it at a shield, and see where the droplets end up.
Sounds like a case of טענו בחטים, והודה לו בשעורים. Your experiment seems to be for protecting the wearer. I'm talking about protecting FROM the wearer.
Post by: Lurker on June 22, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Sounds like a case of טענו בחטים, והודה לו בשעורים. Your experiment seems to be for protecting the wearer. I'm talking about protecting FROM the wearer.
I'm talking about from the wearer. Simulate what singing into a face shield would do to the rest of the room.
Post by: Euclid on June 22, 2020, 02:59:08 PM
Post by: S209 on June 22, 2020, 03:19:12 PM
So are you saying that if an infected person wearing a face shield sings, sneezes or coughs, the aerosol droplets fly towards the shield, take a turn downward when they realize the shield is there, escape, and then float back upward once they clear the shield? That's truly amazing!This would be an example of the science possibly working differently than “your eyes” would assume it to
Post by: S209 on June 22, 2020, 03:22:49 PM
We're falling into the same trap again. Face shields are still infinitely better than nothing.They are probably better than nothing, but I wouldn’t just assume they are in the same league as masks without any evidence.
Post by: yuneeq on June 22, 2020, 04:03:17 PM
They are probably better than nothing, but I wouldn’t just assume they are in the same league as masks without any evidence.
I found this article from May 29: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200529/face-shields-may-be-next-step-to-prevent-covid
It quotes a study in JAMA recommending the use of face shields in certain situations, however states there is no evidence about containing the virus: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2765525
"Of note, no studies have evaluated the effects or potential benefits of face shields on source control, ie, containing a sneeze or cough, when worn by asymptomatic or symptomatic infected persons. However, with efficacy ranges of 68% to 96% for a single face shield, it is likely that adding source control would only improve efficacy, and studies should be completed quickly to evaluate this."
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 04:09:05 PM
I'm talking about from the wearer. Simulate what singing into a face shield would do to the rest of the room.
So in your experiment are you suggesting spraying at the inside of the shield from a distance of 1", 2" or 3".
Anecdotally, at the LTC facility where my mother stays, they provide the residents with face shield for encounters with visitors. Visitors are required to wear face masks (I don't know what would happen if a visitor tried to come with a face shield) and maintain a distance (all outdoors, for no more than 10 minutes, 1 visitor at a time). 0 infection rate in that facility.
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 04:11:17 PM
Post by: points 99 on June 22, 2020, 04:17:50 PM
So in your experiment are you suggesting spraying at the inside of the shield from a distance of 1", 2" or 3".
Anecdotally, at the LTC facility where my mother stays, they provide the residents with face shield for encounters with visitors. Visitors are required to wear face masks (I don't know what would happen if a visitor tried to come with a face shield) and maintain a distance (all outdoors, for no more than 10 minutes, 1 visitor at a time). 0 infection rate in that facility.
Post by: gozalim on June 22, 2020, 05:15:07 PM
Heard one time (you'll definitely know better), that the Chabad shita of בור על גבי בור has to do with a proof from tests of colored water whether or not the water from the 2 בורות mixthe shita is not 'based' on that, it goes back to אדמו"ר הרש"ב.
in the silly disputes raised against it in 'modern' times, one of the sides tried to prove something using a methodology like that. I believe that methodology was disproven
Post by: ExGingi on June 22, 2020, 06:18:23 PM
Heard one time (you'll definitely know better), that the Chabad shita of בור על גבי בור has to do with a proof from tests of colored water whether or not the water from the 2 בורות mix
That maybe has to do with the requirement to replace the water in the bottom בור occasionally. The fact that the top בור has warm water and the bottom בור has cold water, lends itself to the laws of physics that the water isn't likely to mix that much. I don't think that means the water won't mix at all, just at a much lower rate than it would with a בור בצד בור.
Post by: stooges44 on June 23, 2020, 01:54:20 PM
Post by: Kobe Bryant on June 24, 2020, 10:03:29 AM
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 25, 2020, 06:43:20 PM
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 07:50:17 PM
I think this is the proper place to postTry here (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=117283.0)
We’re trying to keep this thread more focused on actual science.
Post by: Lurker on June 25, 2020, 07:52:39 PM
I think this is the proper place to post
No context and fake news. Do you know how many people wear masks every single day? I'm talking without a pandemic.
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 25, 2020, 09:18:03 PM
Try here (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=117283.0)Ooh sharp blow.
We’re trying to keep this thread more focused on actual science.
👌
Is this a censored thread dedicated only to the positive outcomes from masks? Or all related health info?
I agree that this may be a poor way to give over this information but FYI the CDC website has something similar.
This is a PSA for those clearly dehydrating people I saw walking down an deserted sidewalk suffocating on their masks. Immediate definite danger is definitely not trumped by risk of Covid.
I personally saw a parent attempt to put a mask their infant before being stopped by a neighbor.
Read the thread. Definitely not exclusive to science. Last 2 posts: Black people dont need to wear masks and that we shouldnt enforce masks.....
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/parks-rec/aquatic-venues.html
Post by: yuneeq on June 25, 2020, 09:41:21 PM
I think this is the proper place to post
The correct thread is right here: https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=115066.0
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 09:53:58 PM
Ooh sharp blow.Sorry? What exactly are we supposed to see in those links? Didn’t see anything about not enforcing masks or black people.
👌
Is this a censored thread dedicated only to the positive outcomes from masks? Or all related health info?
I agree that this may be a poor way to give over this information but FYI the CDC website has something similar.
This is a PSA for those clearly dehydrating people I saw walking down an deserted sidewalk suffocating on their masks. Immediate definite danger is definitely not trumped by risk of Covid.
I personally saw a parent attempt to put a mask their infant before being stopped by a neighbor.
Read the thread. Definitely not exclusive to science. Last 2 posts: Black people dont need to wear masks and that we shouldnt enforce masks.....
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/parks-rec/aquatic-venues.html
I have yet to hear from any medical authorities that wearing masks by the masses will cause a “surge” in COVID-like respiratory issues. I’d bet you haven’t either. Not sure if you’re trolling.
Post by: CountValentine on June 25, 2020, 10:01:32 PM
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 10:03:42 PM
I should point out you can pass out from wearing a mask (N95) for long periods of time. Especially if you have underlying conditions.I’m sure it’s not good for some people to wear masks for extended periods of time.
Post by: CountValentine on June 25, 2020, 10:08:37 PM
I’m sure it’s not good for some people to wear masks for extended periods of time.Even healthy people will have issues with carbon dioxide.
A team of Stanford engineers is developing an N95 face mask to counteract the side effects of oxygen deficiency. In an interview, John Xu, a mechanical engineer behind the effort, said: N95 masks are estimated to reduce oxygen intake by anywhere from 5 to 20 percent. That’s significant, even for a healthy person. It can cause dizziness and lightheadedness. If you wear a mask long enough, it can damage the lungs. For a patient in respiratory distress, it can even be life threatening.
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 10:13:15 PM
Even healthy people will have issues with carbon dioxide.
A team of Stanford engineers is developing an N95 face mask to counteract the side effects of oxygen deficiency. In an interview, John Xu, a mechanical engineer behind the effort, said: N95 masks are estimated to reduce oxygen intake by anywhere from 5 to 20 percent. That’s significant, even for a healthy person. It can cause dizziness and lightheadedness. If you wear a mask long enough, it can damage the lungs. For a patient in respiratory distress, it can even be life threatening.
Interesting. Fortunately, N95 masks are only recommended for medical personnel.
Post by: CountValentine on June 25, 2020, 10:15:06 PM
Interesting. Fortunately, N95 masks are only recommended for medical personnel.Unfortunately I see a ton of people wearing them as I do. Fortunately I am trained in there use. :)
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 25, 2020, 10:25:09 PM
Sorry? What exactly are we supposed to see in those links? Didn’t see anything about not enforcing masks or black people.Not in those links lol.. I was referring to posts in the "science only" thread.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/dudes-who-wont-wear-masks/613375/
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://nypost.com/2020/06/23/oregon-county-issues-face-mask-order-exempting-non-white-people/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwju6KvhzprqAhX9lXIEHWbEBxMQ0PADegQIBhAH&usg=AOvVaw2Is0rA-QaFwLpbKDecuoHf&cf=1
I wanted to show the CDCs warnings that some people should never wear masks and all people shouldnt under certain conditions.
Quote
I have yet to hear from any medical authorities that wearing masks by the masses will cause a “surge” in COVID-like respiratory issues. I’d bet you haven’t either. Not sure if you’re trolling.
Had you read my post I admitted that the picture is poorly worded but that doesnt take away the dangers it talks about.
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 10:31:24 PM
Not in those links lol.. I was referring to posts in the "science only" thread.Oh lol good point.
I wanted to show the CDCs warnings that some people should never wear masks and all people shouldnt under certain conditions.
Had you read my post I admitted that the picture is poorly worded but that doesnt take away the dangers it talks about.
Yes, people need to be careful with masks (like everything in life). No, the dangers are nothing like the dangers of COVID. Poorly worded is an understatement, but point taken.
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 10:34:10 PM
I think this is the proper place to post
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/30/fact-check-wearing-face-mask-not-cause-hypoxia-hypercapnia/5260106002/
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 25, 2020, 10:45:37 PM
End of the article
Quote
Our rating: Partly false
I was slightly motivated to post about this after once clearing my throat and almost inhaling an entire mask. Panicked for a few seconds as I gagged.
Article is well written however I would argue that although the surgical masks are "highly porous and breathable" they often are folded which makes it difficult to breath.
Post by: S209 on June 25, 2020, 10:49:21 PM
I was slightly motivated to post about this after once clearing my throat and almost inhaling an entire mask. Panicked for a few seconds as I gagged.LOL
Post by: ExGingi on June 28, 2020, 12:43:30 AM
What does a mask do? Blocks respiratory droplets coming from your mouth and throat.
— Rich Davis, PhD, D(ABMM), MLS 🦠🔬🧫 (@richdavisphd) June 26, 2020
Two simple demos:
First, I sneezed, sang, talked & coughed toward an agar culture plate with or without a mask. Bacteria colonies show where droplets landed. A mask blocks virtually all of them. pic.twitter.com/ETUD9DFmgU
Click on tweet to see thread.
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 28, 2020, 12:57:20 AM
What does a mask do? Blocks respiratory droplets coming from your mouth and throat.
— Rich Davis, PhD, D(ABMM), MLS 🦠🔬🧫 (@richdavisphd) June 26, 2020
Two simple demos:
First, I sneezed, sang, talked & coughed toward an agar culture plate with or without a mask. Bacteria colonies show where droplets landed. A mask blocks virtually all of them. pic.twitter.com/ETUD9DFmgU
Click on tweet to see thread.
So it's ok to go out if coughing as long as you wear a mask?
Post by: Kobe Bryant on June 28, 2020, 02:30:20 AM
Which mask was he wearing?What does a mask do? Blocks respiratory droplets coming from your mouth and throat.
— Rich Davis, PhD, D(ABMM), MLS 🦠🔬🧫 (@richdavisphd) June 26, 2020
Two simple demos:
First, I sneezed, sang, talked & coughed toward an agar culture plate with or without a mask. Bacteria colonies show where droplets landed. A mask blocks virtually all of them. pic.twitter.com/ETUD9DFmgU
Click on tweet to see thread.
Post by: yuneeq on June 28, 2020, 07:33:38 AM
So it's ok to go out if coughing as long as you wear a mask?
https://mobile.twitter.com/richdavisphd/status/1276737371464060928
Which mask was he wearing?
Regular 3 ply
Post by: moish on June 28, 2020, 08:22:19 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/richdavisphd/status/1276737371464060928Don't you have a video of proof of this?
Regular 3 ply
Post by: moish on June 28, 2020, 10:34:54 AM
Post by: SE on June 29, 2020, 12:13:58 AM
Post by: etech0 on June 29, 2020, 12:14:47 AM
https://www.dansdeals.com/shopping-deals/2-pack-adults-childrens-fabric-reusable-face-masks-just-4-target/
Post by: SE on June 29, 2020, 12:16:22 AM
Post by: gozalim on June 29, 2020, 12:19:23 AM
Have you tried the reusable ones from target? they are fairly breathable (and only $4 for 2)these are considerably more bearable than many of the disposable ones, but still not fun
https://www.dansdeals.com/shopping-deals/2-pack-adults-childrens-fabric-reusable-face-masks-just-4-target/
Post by: yuneeq on June 29, 2020, 08:50:43 AM
I am desperate to find a REAL breathable mask. I feel like I am suffocating. I have COVID antibodies so am not so conderned about getting the virus. (Not asking for debate about masks or antibodies-just for recommendations of masks that you can actually breathe in.)
I had some Moldex N95 masks (2600 series) that are pretty breathable.
Post by: ExGingi on June 29, 2020, 10:43:58 AM
I had some Moldex N95 masks (2600 series) that are pretty breathable.Not available to the general public.
Also, if it's all about protecting others, does N95 make a difference?
Post by: avromie7 on June 29, 2020, 12:52:19 PM
I am desperate to find a REAL breathable mask. I feel like I am suffocating. I have COVID antibodies so am not so conderned about getting the virus. (Not asking for debate about masks or antibodies-just for recommendations of masks that you can actually breathe in.)The Trump masks are definitely better than the surgical masks.
Post by: yuneeq on June 29, 2020, 01:18:36 PM
Not available to the general public.
Also, if it's all about protecting others, does N95 make a difference?
I have small stock of some N95s I may be willing to sell, like 10-15 pieces. It’s easier to get N95 nowadays, though I don’t think it protects others more than a 3 ply. He’s looking for comfort and I find some N95 masks to be great for comfort. Some are terrible.
Post by: S209 on June 29, 2020, 01:29:00 PM
The Trump masks are definitely better than the surgical masks.Yes they’re awesome! Got mine yesterday
Post by: Kobe Bryant on June 29, 2020, 01:53:14 PM
The Trump masks are definitely better than the surgical masks.And free.
Post by: biobook on June 30, 2020, 12:26:05 AM
I'm confirmed antibody positive. I can't be passing covid germs to anybody. why should I wear a mask?
(I assume we should, if we chooses to continue, move this to one of the numerous covid threads.)
Maybe the thread called Masks (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=115316.0)? But as long as I'm here, the reasons to wear a mask areYou think you're immune to covid, so 1-3 don't apply, but 4 does.
- to avoid exhaling covid germs that may infect others
- to avoid inhaling covid germs that may get you sick
- to avoid touching your nose and mouth with hands that may contain covid germs
- to contribute to the creation of a social environment in which mask-wearing is accepted and expected
I'm sure you agree that those who are currently infected, or who haven't been infected yet should be wearing a mask to protect themselves and others. But people don't want to stick out from the crowd, and those who should wear a mask may reject it for this reason. Your wearing a mask helps encourage mask-wearing by those who really need to.
4 alone is a weak reason that although true and virtuous wont convince the public.It was intended to convince @ckmk47 and other virtuous folks.
Let's be honest... everyone in israel wears masks and its spreading there. Masks are cute and nice but they don't actually have enough of a meaningful impact to make anyone who had covid to take care about it. And look at whats going on around us, people are literally destroying cities, defunding police departments and creating total anarchy in the streets. You think these same guys care about what any dr or official says... they don't. Thats why masks will most likely never be widespread in the us.ckmk47 asked why she personally should wear a mask, and my answer was based on the assumption that she is not out there destroying cities, either literally or figuratively, or creating anarchy, either total or partial.
Post by: Mikes@Micro on June 30, 2020, 12:34:14 AM
It was intended to convince @ckmk47 and other virtuous folks.This last part brings back memories of a NYT piece blaming a spike in cases on "pro gun people not wearing masks bc they take pleasure in killing people"
ckmk47 asked why she personally should wear a mask, and my answer was based on the assumption that she is not out there destroying cities, either literally or figuratively, or creating anarchy, either total or partial.
The virus is trumps fault bc he supports the 2nd amendment which encourages people to infect their friends.
They did not write this sarcastically.
Post by: ExGingi on June 30, 2020, 07:15:17 PM
I just started listening to TWiV episode 598 from early April, and came across this gem at 2:38!!!! You must listen to it yourself to put things into perspective. https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-598/
Post by: yuneeq on June 30, 2020, 09:13:00 PM
It's amazing how short people's memories are (and probably overwhelmed by the extensive lockdowns, and ever-changing guidelines and happenings).
I just started listening to TWiV episode 598 from early April, and came across this gem at 2:38!!!! You must listen to it yourself to put things into perspective. https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-598/
They must not read DDF ;D
Except the fact that the incubation period is very long and spread disease even without being sick. No one knows they have the virus until they develop symptoms and get tested, and by then it's way too late. Not to mention that the sick people don't have any masks because the CDC told them not to buy any.
a) Masks prevent you from touching your face.
b) The virus is spreading asymptomatically, and the viral payload is highest at the beginning of infection. Most of the community spread infection is coming during this period. Sick people stay at home more and cause less infection than healthy asymptomatic patients. Telling only sick people to wear masks does almost nothing to stop the contagion.
c) Telling people not to buy masks until they're sick means they won't have a mask once they get sick.
d) China implemented mask wearing on the entire population, and they're containing the outbreak. Is this solid proof that it's helping? No, but it sure isn't hurting them and it seems like it helped.
e) The claim that a surgical mask or an improperly fitted mask means that a person is not fully protected, is true. But, though it might not block all virus particles all of the time, it will still block all virus particles some of the time.
f) Most of the reasons given by the CDC are basically - "hey there's unrelated reasons where it doesn't work!!". Correct, not sanitizing properly can still lead to infection even with a mask. But even the most properly fitted mask, where the user doesn't wear goggles, is risking infection. Stick with the facts - wearing a mask decreases likelihood of infection.
g) What mask shortage? Medical staff don't need masks if anyways they're completely useless for prevention (according to CDC). Just save a couple thousand masks for the 160 COVID patients and all the medical staff will be fine and dandy.
h) Is it really that hard to see that the CDC is in anti-panic mode, and trying to control the impending backlash against them, spitting out nonsense like - "the immediate risk is low" - translation - soon the risk will be pretty high, but we want you to feel everything is fine.
Edit:
i) Increased exposure leads to increased severity of illness and death. Hence all the young healthy doctors that statistically shouldn't be dying, but are. Even with a bad mask, not being exposed to the full payload is better than nothing.
Sad that everything I wrote was pretty obvious and true, but not (re)discovered until months later when the CDC decided to stop lying.
Post by: ExGingi on June 30, 2020, 09:24:31 PM
They must not read DDF ;D-1
You really think that other than you (and possibly the guy with the selective elephant memory) many that read DDF would remember those posts at this point?
Post by: Lurker on July 01, 2020, 10:16:19 AM
-1
You really think that other than you (and possibly the guy with the selective elephant memory) many that read DDF would remember those posts at this point?
Those specific posts? Maybe not. But masks have been talked about pretty consistently on here.
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 11:10:36 AM
Post by: Kobe Bryant on July 01, 2020, 11:17:50 AM
...but not (re)discovered until months later when the CDC decided to stop lying.I think this is the crux of the matter. Why would the public trust the medical and political establishment when they have been lying for months?
Post by: S209 on July 01, 2020, 12:48:18 PM
I think this is the crux of the matter. Why would the public trust theFTFYmedical andpolitical establishment when they have been lying for months?
Post by: yuneeq on July 01, 2020, 01:40:31 PM
I think this is the crux of the matter. Why would the public trust the medical and political establishment when they have been lying for months?
The public shouldn't trust them, you should only trust what the studies conclude sprinkled with some common sense. That's why when Desantis tells you everything is fine and refuses to release data, you should expect that something is wrong. He can't be caught lying if there's no data to prove him wrong.
-1
You really think that other than you (and possibly the guy with the selective elephant memory) many that read DDF would remember those posts at this point?
I don't think I understood the point of your post (and still don't), I thought you were trying to say how nobody discovered the usefulness of masks until April.
Post by: ExGingi on July 01, 2020, 02:59:43 PM
I don't think I understood the point of your post (and still don't), I thought you were trying to say how nobody discovered the usefulness of masks until April.
Not at all. Usefulness of masks wasn't debatable (though there was an argument about it causing increased hand contact with face for people unaccustomed to wearing masks). The point I was making with my post was that at this time (I am guessing that) very few remember that there was guidance saying not to use masks.
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 03:00:18 PM
I think this is the crux of the matter. Why would the public trust the medical and political establishment when they have been lying for months?Try using some common sense?
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 03:01:45 PM
The point I was making with my post was that at this time (I am guessing that) very few remember that there was guidance saying not to use masks.All I hear is how could they have been so wrong. So I disagree very few remember.
Post by: Lurker on July 01, 2020, 03:12:12 PM
Try using some common sense?
I think I just solved the mystery of the negative hat tip!
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 03:15:55 PM
I think I just solved the mystery of the negative hat tip!Then maybe work on the gender mystery. :)
Post by: Lurker on July 01, 2020, 03:20:52 PM
Then maybe work on the gender mystery. :)
Nah, I'm good. You could identity as a butterfly for all I care.
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 03:21:19 PM
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 03:21:54 PM
Nah, I'm good. You could identity as a butterfly for all I care.Then the butterflies would hate me also.
Post by: S209 on July 01, 2020, 10:44:36 PM
https://www.sun-sentinel.com/coronavirus/ct-nw-trump-coronavirus-mask-20200701-icf63vlvmfd37i3u4rclyyg3rm-story.htmlPresident #Trump says he looks like Lone Ranger in a mask and likes it: â€I’m all for masks. I think masks are good’ https://t.co/VcgyLqRDcf pic.twitter.com/HzHXQF3csS
— South Florida Sun Sentinel (@SunSentinel) July 1, 2020
Post by: CountValentine on July 01, 2020, 10:49:43 PM
Trump now has no problem with wearing a mask. He says he looks like the Lone Ranger. Someone please tell the idiot you don't wear the mask over your eyes. What a moron!!!
Post by: CountValentine on July 02, 2020, 09:15:52 AM
Post by: ExGingi on July 02, 2020, 09:21:38 AM
I think we need to educate people on how to wear a mask. I see so many not covering their nose.
Since when are chin masks supposed to cover one's nose?
Post by: CountValentine on July 02, 2020, 09:25:05 AM
Since when are chin masks supposed to cover one's nose?Is there a joke I am missing?
Post by: Lurker on July 02, 2020, 04:48:33 PM
Post by: ExGingi on July 05, 2020, 06:16:37 PM
I actually think my invisible mask looks better and provides better protection.
Post by: ExGingi on July 07, 2020, 09:52:23 PM
Post by: Yard sale on July 08, 2020, 09:25:14 AM
Knucklehead
Post by: ExGingi on July 08, 2020, 09:30:01 AM
https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/07/nj-will-now-require-people-wear-masks-outside-to-battle-coronavirus-murphy-says.html
Knucklehead
That's an understatement.
Post by: Yard sale on July 08, 2020, 09:43:04 AM
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 09:52:39 AM
Post by: Ergel on July 08, 2020, 10:03:22 AM
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 10:11:46 AM
Post by: Lurker on July 08, 2020, 10:16:57 AM
I didn't get that memo. :)
You haven't been paying attention. Put down the paintbrush for a few minutes ;)
Post by: avromie7 on July 08, 2020, 10:26:34 AM
Post by: Dan on July 08, 2020, 10:29:28 AM
Is there any evidence that masks help in any meaningful way when worn outdoors?Will you be 6 feet away from people?
Post by: Lurker on July 08, 2020, 10:31:30 AM
Is there any evidence that masks help in any meaningful way when worn outdoors?
It's important to note that Murphy said, "We’re gonna ask you: If you can’t socially distance, it’s gonna be required.” So yes, when you're in close quarters, even outdoors, masks are very helpful.
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 10:34:01 AM
You haven't been paying attention. Put down the paintbrush for a few minutes ;)Only way I can keep everyone straight.
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 10:34:51 AM
Is there any evidence that masks help in any meaningful way when worn outdoors?There is no evidence mask every did help or ever will help. You happy now? ::)
Post by: Yard sale on July 08, 2020, 10:35:06 AM
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 10:36:25 AM
It's important to note that Murphy said, "We’re gonna ask you: If you can’t socially distance, it’s gonna be required.” So yes, when you're in close quarters, even outdoors, masks are very helpful.What is the issue then?
If Trump said that he would get an A+ from me for saying it.
Post by: biobook on July 08, 2020, 10:58:41 AM
https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/07/nj-will-now-require-people-wear-masks-outside-to-battle-coronavirus-murphy-says.htmlCould you clarify what fault you find with the requirement to "wear masks outside when social distancing isn't possible"?
Knucklehead
Post by: ExGingi on July 08, 2020, 11:07:23 AM
Will you be 6 feet away from people?Nope. Only 5ft.
Post by: db23 on July 08, 2020, 11:11:08 AM
Nope. Only 5ft.
real guideline is around 3 feet. they say 4-6 feet for a buffer.
Post by: Lurker on July 08, 2020, 11:12:20 AM
Could you clarify what fault you find with the requirement to "wear masks outside when social distancing isn't possible"?
The argument is that there aren't enough cases in NJ to warrant any mask usage at all, and by pushing this mandate now, it increases the chance that it will be ignored in a few weeks when it will actually be necessary.
Post by: Lurker on July 08, 2020, 11:12:34 AM
real guideline is around 3 feet. they say 4-6 feet for a buffer.
Source?
Post by: yuneeq on July 08, 2020, 11:12:52 AM
Post by: Lurker on July 08, 2020, 11:13:58 AM
My questions for Murphy are - why wait until now to say this? And why is the rules for outdoors more stringent than indoors?
In what way?
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 11:19:09 AM
My questions for Murphy are - why wait until now to say this?Because he is an idiot but this one he got right.
Post by: yuneeq on July 08, 2020, 11:19:18 AM
In what way?
Masks are not always required indoors "when social distancing is not possible".
Post by: CountValentine on July 08, 2020, 11:21:07 AM
Masks are not always required indoors "when social distancing is not possible".So the same for indoor and outdoor?
Post by: Yo ssi on July 08, 2020, 11:28:19 AM
real guideline is around 3 feet. they say 4-6 feet for a buffer.That reminds me of Canada, they have different lengths for different ages
Post by: db23 on July 08, 2020, 11:33:56 AM
Source?
this from the WHO. (also saw it in A WSJ video on sports stadium safety)
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public
"Maintain at least 1 metre (3 feet) distance between yourself and others. Why? When someone coughs, sneezes, or speaks they spray small liquid droplets from their nose or mouth which may contain virus"
Post by: Mikes@Micro on July 08, 2020, 11:35:53 AM
My questions for Murphy are - why wait until now to say this? And why is the rules for outdoors more stringent than indoors?Wasnt the election yesterday?
Post by: yuneeq on July 08, 2020, 11:36:34 AM
this from the WHO. (also saw it in A WSJ video on sports stadium safety)
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public
"Maintain at least 1 metre (3 feet) distance between yourself and others. Why? When someone coughs, sneezes, or speaks they spray small liquid droplets from their nose or mouth which may contain virus"
Please never quote the WHO. Happy they finally caved in to public pressure.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-airborne/who-acknowledges-evidence-emerging-of-airborne-spread-of-covid-19-idUSKBN2482AU
Quote
Any change in the WHO’s assessment of risk of transmission could affect its current advice on keeping 1-metre (3.3 feet) of physical distancing. Governments, which rely on the agency for guidance policy, may also have to adjust public health measures aimed at curbing the spread of the virus.
Post by: Lurker on July 08, 2020, 11:38:23 AM
this from the WHO. (also saw it in A WSJ video on sports stadium safety)
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public
"Maintain at least 1 metre (3 feet) distance between yourself and others. Why? When someone coughs, sneezes, or speaks they spray small liquid droplets from their nose or mouth which may contain virus"
That was from before they admitted the virus is airborne. Kinda changes a few things...
Post by: Lurker on July 09, 2020, 02:19:54 PM
Post by: S209 on July 09, 2020, 03:20:50 PM
https://www.foxnews.com/health/wearing-mask-cuts-own-risk-novel-coronavirus-65-percent-experts-say
Quote
“Everyone should wear a mask,” Blumberg said. “People who say, ‘I don’t believe masks work,’ are ignoring scientific evidence. It’s not a belief system. It’s like saying, ‘I don’t believe in gravity.’"
Post by: ExGingi on July 09, 2020, 04:03:28 PM
Quote“Everyone should wear a mask,” Blumberg said. “People who say, ‘I don’t believe masks work,’ are ignoring scientific evidence. It’s not a belief system. It’s like saying, ‘I don’t believe in gravity.’"
בהשגחה פרטית this past week there's a Hayom Yom that some people struggle with, thinking that it somehow denies gravity:
(https://i.imgur.com/QcZFRR1.png)
In actuality, this doesn't at all deny gravity, and is probably fully in-line with current astrophysics. The Alter Rebbe isn't saying that gravity doesn't exist, he's saying that attributing not falling off the face of the earth on the other to gravity is the wrong answer. What the Alter Rebbe is saying is that the entire premise of question is wrong, as there is no real upper and lower side to earth.
Post by: gozalim on July 09, 2020, 04:44:04 PM
please elaborate. that it isn't saying the oversimplification is granted. detailed specifics of what it is saying i'd love to hear
בהשגחה פרטית this past week there's a Hayom Yom that some people struggle with, thinking that it somehow denies gravity:
(https://i.imgur.com/QcZFRR1.png)
In actuality, this doesn't at all deny gravity, and is probably fully in-line with current astrophysics. The Alter Rebbe isn't saying that gravity doesn't exist, he's saying that attributing not falling off the face of the earth on the other to gravity is the wrong answer. What the Alter Rebbe is saying is that the entire premise of question is wrong, as there is no real upper and lower side to earth.
Post by: ExGingi on July 09, 2020, 04:57:03 PM
please elaborate. that it isn't saying the oversimplification is granted. detailed specifics of what it is saying i'd love to hear
Not sure what detailed specifics you're looking for, when it's right there in front of everyone's eyes to see. The "chidush" is that he is drawing the physical conclusion from a metaphysical (I'm not sure if that's the right term, but I didn't want to use ruchnius, as I'm not sure that's the right term either, maybe @Freddie can help) concept. In the physical world, a circle has no beginning or end, and a sphere has no top or bottom, as all sides are the same. If I understand correctly, the Alter Rebbe is saying that the reason the laws of physics are such in regards to spheres, is because they draw their physical existence from the metaphysical concept of Igulim which have no top or bottom (i.e. there's no higher or lower level within an igul).
Post by: jj1000 on July 14, 2020, 12:13:40 AM
What happened to the Honeywell masks post from JJ?https://www.dansdeals.com/more/coronavirus/200-honeywell-niosh-certified-n95-respirators-just-270-shipped/
Post by: yitzgar on July 14, 2020, 12:14:02 AM
https://www.dansdeals.com/more/coronavirus/200-honeywell-niosh-certified-n95-respirators-just-270-shipped/Just saw it there, thanks
Post by: Jeremiah on July 17, 2020, 09:15:56 AM
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87120
I love the part about people wearing a mask in their car alone. It always made me chuckle. People just wear masks without thinking.
Post by: CountValentine on July 17, 2020, 09:19:47 AM
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87120The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author.
I love the part about people wearing a mask in their car alone. It always made me chuckle. People just wear masks without thinking.Some find it easier to just keep it on. They might also might be picking someone up.
Post by: Jeremiah on July 17, 2020, 09:25:41 AM
Post by: CountValentine on July 17, 2020, 09:28:58 AM
I'm aware. I happen to agree to lots of what he said. You cant prove that they are ineffective but there is not enough hard evidence the other way. And there are consequences the other way. Bottom line just use common sense. No need to force this onto healthy people. People in the high risk category will take extra precautions anywaysFor the majority of Americans wearing a mask is no big deal. If they are not affective nothing is lost. If they are affective it will save lives.
Pretty simple chose for me.
Post by: S209 on July 17, 2020, 09:46:27 AM
OK I'll continue here.This article focuses exclusively on the efficacy of mask wearing as *protection* but doesn’t even discuss the efficacy of masks as far as transmission *to others* (which would obviously be the point of a mask mandate). Oh, and for protection? He concludes that at risk people (health care workers, the elderly) *should* most definitely be wearing masks *as protection*, and (surprise, surprise!) isn’t worried about all of the terrible effects on health that masks are supposed to be causing.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87120
I love the part about people wearing a mask in their car alone. It always made me chuckle. People just wear masks without thinking.
No, people don’t just wear masks without thinking. There are many reasons you would see someone in a car with a mask. But if everyone *would* wear masks without thinking we’d all be a lot better off.
Post by: aygart on July 17, 2020, 09:49:19 AM
You cant prove that they are ineffectiveThat is absolutely true, and the reason is because they ARE effective and there is PLENTY of hard evidence to prove it.
Post by: S209 on July 17, 2020, 09:49:51 AM
I'm aware. I happen to agree to lots of what he said. You cant prove that they are ineffective but there is not enough hard evidence the other way. And there are consequences the other way. Bottom line just use common sense. No need to force this onto healthy people. People in the high risk category will take extra precautions anywaysYou clearly missed the purpose of his piece. There are no consequences the other way- he is concerned about the lack of PPE available, but a homemade mask won’t cause that and will protect others as well. There is absolutely a preponderance of hard evidence that mask wearing protects others. It’s not in dispute by any actual scientists or doctors. Seemingly masks protect the wearer as well, but there is *less* proof and it is *less effective* in that way.
Post by: Lurker on July 17, 2020, 09:56:57 AM
Post by: Mikes@Micro on July 17, 2020, 10:26:09 AM
Post by: aygart on July 17, 2020, 10:31:54 AM
@S209 we've gone through this before (cue the wheel....) but do you care to elaborate on reasons to wear a mask when alone in a car?1. To not be constantly touching the mask before washing your hands
2. For convenience to avoid copnstantly taking it on and off for a person who is not bothered by it
3. Because they will be picking up passengers shortly.
Post by: S209 on July 17, 2020, 10:38:38 AM
@S209 we've gone through this before (cue the wheel....) but do you care to elaborate on reasons to wear a mask when alone in a car?
1. To not be constantly touching the mask before washing your hands👆
2. For convenience to avoid copnstantly taking it on and off for a person who is not bothered by it
3. Because they will be picking up passengers shortly.
Post by: CountValentine on July 17, 2020, 10:49:43 AM
Y'all wasting your time... don't you know all the doctors and the king governors are just lying to you? Covid is cancelled, there's herd immunity in NY/NJ. It wasn't even a huge price to pay, just the brain cells that control rational thought.The logic is if an expert is wrong on one thing they are wrong on all things.
Cue the polls. ;)
Post by: moish on July 17, 2020, 12:19:50 PM
1. To not be constantly touching the mask before washing your handsAnd if wearing something like an N95, to ensure proper fit which is easier done in a house setting vs sitting in your car.
2. For convenience to avoid copnstantly taking it on and off for a person who is not bothered by it
3. Because they will be picking up passengers shortly.
Post by: gozalim on July 17, 2020, 12:34:28 PM
No need to force this onto healthy people. People in the high risk category will take extra precautions anywaysthose healthy peope have every likelihood of being asymptomatic vectors
Post by: gozalim on July 17, 2020, 12:35:46 PM
Post by: chinagel on July 17, 2020, 12:41:56 PM
IIRC the Rambam does not agree with gravity. It is only a theory.
בהשגחה פרטית this past week there's a Hayom Yom that some people struggle with, thinking that it somehow denies gravity:
(https://i.imgur.com/QcZFRR1.png)
In actuality, this doesn't at all deny gravity, and is probably fully in-line with current astrophysics. The Alter Rebbe isn't saying that gravity doesn't exist, he's saying that attributing not falling off the face of the earth on the other to gravity is the wrong answer. What the Alter Rebbe is saying is that the entire premise of question is wrong, as there is no real upper and lower side to earth.
Post by: CountValentine on July 17, 2020, 12:50:44 PM
Oh, and CV spells and grammars like yeshivishDo you prefer "que" or "queue"?
Post by: chinagel on July 17, 2020, 12:51:14 PM
Do you prefer "que" or "queue"?kyoo
Post by: S209 on July 17, 2020, 12:52:49 PM
Post by: ExGingi on July 17, 2020, 03:04:21 PM
IIRC the Rambam does not agree with gravity. It is only a theory.
Source?
Post by: CountValentine on July 17, 2020, 03:22:01 PM
Source?I won't say it. :)
Post by: chinagel on July 17, 2020, 03:40:50 PM
Source?Yesodei Hatorah 4; 2
Post by: 4yourinfo on July 17, 2020, 04:04:14 PM
https://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/opinion/2020/07/17/just-wear-the-damn-mask-and-other-truths-from-actual-doctors.html?Here's a reason not to wear a mask - if someone has antibodies and according to "studies" the antibodies seem to fade after a few months than maybe constantly getting exposed to the virus will keep the antibodies from disappearing! Like a booster shot - there are multiple articles out there very wary of any vaccine as the vaccine will wear off just like we're seeing with antibodies...
Post by: S209 on July 17, 2020, 04:36:40 PM
Here's a reason not to wear a mask - if someone has antibodies and according to "studies" the antibodies seem to fade after a few months than maybe constantly getting exposed to the virus will keep the antibodies from disappearing! Like a booster shot - there are multiple articles out there very wary of any vaccine as the vaccine will wear off just like we're seeing with antibodies...That’s a nice explanation. Shame there’s zero scientific backing to it. Because that would mean constantly getting reinfected. Which is sort of the point of masks, to prevent infections.
Although I agree if you have antibodies you can make a strong argument not to wear a mask.
Post by: moish on July 18, 2020, 05:11:06 PM
Although I agree if you have antibodies you can make a strong argument not to wear a mask.Well, the problem with that is that the more people that don't wear masks, the more it causes others not to as well, including those that need to be wearing them.
Post by: Mikes@Micro on July 18, 2020, 10:45:12 PM
Well, the problem with that is that the more people that don't wear masks, the more it causes others not to as well, including those that need to be wearing them.That's social engineering, not medicine.
Post by: 4yourinfo on July 18, 2020, 10:54:50 PM
That’s a nice explanation. Shame there’s zero scientific backing to it. Because that would mean constantly getting reinfected. Which is sort of the point of masks, to prevent infections.Thank you - I wish I knew exactly how these Antibodies work. When you get exposed to the virus does your body completely repel the virus or does it fight it a bit - strenthing the antibodies...
Although I agree if you have antibodies you can make a strong argument not to wear a mask.
Post by: ExGingi on July 18, 2020, 11:11:17 PM
Yesodei Hatorah 4; 2
How do you read into that a disagreement with gravity?
Post by: chinagel on July 18, 2020, 11:16:44 PM
How do you read into that a disagreement with gravity?דֶּרֶךְ הָאֵשׁ וְהָרוּחַ לִהְיוֹת מַהֲלָכָם מִמַּטָּה מִטַּבּוּר הָאָרֶץ לְמַעְלָה כְּלַפֵּי הָרָקִיעַ. וְדֶרֶךְ הַמַּיִם וְהָאָרֶץ לִהְיוֹת מַהֲלָכָם מִתַּחַת הָרָקִיעַ לְמַטָּה עַד לָאֶמְצַע.
Gravity explains the attraction as coming from the center of earth, Rambam is explaining it as the nature of the object itself.
Post by: S209 on July 18, 2020, 11:22:06 PM
דֶּרֶךְ הָאֵשׁ וְהָרוּחַ לִהְיוֹת מַהֲלָכָם מִמַּטָּה מִטַּבּוּר הָאָרֶץ לְמַעְלָה כְּלַפֵּי הָרָקִיעַ. וְדֶרֶךְ הַמַּיִם וְהָאָרֶץ לִהְיוֹת מַהֲלָכָם מִתַּחַת הָרָקִיעַ לְמַטָּה עַד לָאֶמְצַע.Actually, gravity as explained by Newton is that objects are attracted to each other
Gravity explains the attraction as coming from the center of earth, Rambam is explaining it as the nature of the object itself.
Post by: chinagel on July 18, 2020, 11:57:08 PM
Actually, gravity as explained by Newton is that objects are attracted to each otherAre you saying that changes anything or just observing?
Post by: S209 on July 19, 2020, 12:00:58 AM
Are you saying that changes anything or just observing?The latter :)
Post by: PlatinumGuy on July 19, 2020, 01:37:42 AM
Gravity explains the attraction as coming from the center of earthNot true
דֶּרֶךְ הָאֵשׁ וְהָרוּחַ לִהְיוֹת מַהֲלָכָם מִמַּטָּה מִטַּבּוּר הָאָרֶץ לְמַעְלָה כְּלַפֵּי הָרָקִיעַ. וְדֶרֶךְ הַמַּיִם וְהָאָרֶץ לִהְיוֹת מַהֲלָכָם מִתַּחַת הָרָקִיעַ לְמַטָּה עַד לָאֶמְצַע.It can still be true even if they were pulled by the center of earth
Post by: cmey on July 19, 2020, 02:35:26 AM
(https://i.postimg.cc/7Zdx1M3p/A4-D47-DDA-5-BF5-41-BF-9909-349-AE5-EFA420.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Post by: ExGingi on July 19, 2020, 11:44:19 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/face-masks-really-do-matter-the-scientific-evidence-is-growing-11595083298
(https://i.postimg.cc/7Zdx1M3p/A4-D47-DDA-5-BF5-41-BF-9909-349-AE5-EFA420.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Amazing. Almost like anti-vaxers.
Masks protect OTHERS from infected people wearing them. Just like the vaccines protect the anti-vaxers because a large percentage has built-up immunity.
Post by: gozalim on July 19, 2020, 12:28:57 PM
Post by: S209 on July 19, 2020, 12:31:51 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/face-masks-really-do-matter-the-scientific-evidence-is-growing-11595083298Classic radical far left journalism from the WSJ
(https://i.postimg.cc/7Zdx1M3p/A4-D47-DDA-5-BF5-41-BF-9909-349-AE5-EFA420.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
/s
Post by: aygart on July 19, 2020, 12:50:50 PM
Amazing. Almost like anti-vaxers.Are you trying to say that a non-mask wearer is being as selfish and irresponsible as an anti-vaxxer? :P
Masks protect OTHERS from infected people wearing them. Just like the vaccines protect the anti-vaxers because a large percentage has built-up immunity.
Post by: ExGingi on July 19, 2020, 01:22:39 PM
Any indication if said person was wearing a mask while attending?
Post by: S209 on July 19, 2020, 04:10:47 PM
https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1883545/horrifying-virus-carrier-attended-shul-despite-diagnosis-leading-to-death-of-rav-shmuel-ashkenazi-ztl.html
Just putting this here.
Post by: neveryou on July 19, 2020, 04:14:14 PM
Post by: incendia on July 19, 2020, 05:52:03 PM
.
People that post BS like this endanger people that have genuine disabilities and heath issues.
Same issue as people that try to pass pets off as service animals.
Post by: PlatinumGuy on July 19, 2020, 07:43:21 PM
Post by: username on July 20, 2020, 04:00:42 PM
To help bring consistency across stores and clubs, we will require all shoppers to wear a face covering starting Monday, July 20. This will give us time to inform customers and members of the changes, post signage and train associates on the new protocols.
WALMART- The ambassadors, identifiable by their black polo shirts, will work with customers who show up at a store without a face covering to try and find a solution.
SAMS CLUB- At Sam’s Clubs, associates at the entrance will follow the same process with members, politely reminding them of our requirement to wear a face covering when shopping with us. Complimentary masks will be provided if the member doesn’t have one. Or members can purchase masks in the club.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on July 21, 2020, 07:20:20 PM
My costum made "I Am Virtue Signaling" mask should be arriving soon.
Post by: gozalim on July 21, 2020, 08:22:37 PM
My costume made "I Am Virtue Signaling" mask should be arriving soon.freudian slip?
Post by: ExGingi on July 23, 2020, 11:58:05 PM
A few observations:🷠What’s the best homemade face mask to curb #Covid19?
— Bloomberg Quicktake (@Quicktake) July 24, 2020
You’ll need at least 2 layers, scientists @Globalbiosec @UNSW in Australia found using a LED lighting system and high-speed video camera. More @business: https://t.co/7ClbtNsvOE pic.twitter.com/GWh3HhlaGw
1. There's no mention of the difference between covering the nose or not. The images seem to indicate almost no excretion from the nose.
2. How meaningful is this study if it only shows the effects 5cm away? How about a more normal 50cm away, which would probably be the minimum distance between the faces of two people facing each other.
Post by: aygart on July 24, 2020, 10:41:58 AM
2. How meaningful is this study if it only shows the effects 5cm away? How about a more normal 50cm away, which would probably be the minimum distance between the faces of two people facing each other.
Agreed. A mask which doesn't filter droplets and aerosols but slows their velocity to prevent them from traveling far or staying airborne is also a very significant benefit.
Post by: ExGingi on July 24, 2020, 01:05:38 PM
Agreed. A mask which doesn't filter droplets and aerosols but slows their velocity to prevent them from traveling far or staying airborne is also a very significant benefit.
Exactly my point. But that would be missed by almost everyone (and I would venture to say that the omission is probably intentional).
Post by: neveryou on July 24, 2020, 01:23:00 PM
Post by: avromie7 on July 24, 2020, 01:51:51 PM
5cm is the scale, the line under 5cm is equivalent to 5cm.A few observations:🷠What’s the best homemade face mask to curb #Covid19?
— Bloomberg Quicktake (@Quicktake) July 24, 2020
You’ll need at least 2 layers, scientists @Globalbiosec @UNSW in Australia found using a LED lighting system and high-speed video camera. More @business: https://t.co/7ClbtNsvOE pic.twitter.com/GWh3HhlaGw
1. There's no mention of the difference between covering the nose or not. The images seem to indicate almost no excretion from the nose.
2. How meaningful is this study if it only shows the effects 5cm away? How about a more normal 50cm away, which would probably be the minimum distance between the faces of two people facing each other.
Post by: ExGingi on July 24, 2020, 02:19:34 PM
5cm is the scale, the line under 5cm is equivalent to 5cm.
I stand corrected. So based on my non-scientific observation, the images seem to illustrate the effects about 15cm-25cm out. I would argue that most face to face interactions are at a greater distance (at least double), and even at the shown distance, it seems like even with the lowest quality mask there are very few droplets, if any, that reach the 25cm range.
Post by: aygart on July 24, 2020, 02:21:50 PM
I stand corrected. So based on my non-scientific observation, the images seem to illustrate the effects about 15cm-25cm out. I would argue that most face to face interactions are at a greater distance (at least double), and even at the shown distance, it seems like even with the lowest quality mask there are very few droplets, if any, that reach the 25cm range.One variable may be how log they stay airborne. I have no data on that.
Post by: ExGingi on July 24, 2020, 02:38:45 PM
HT: @hvaces42
Post by: ExGingi on July 24, 2020, 02:39:41 PM
One variable may be how log they stay airborne. I have no data on that.
Everyone seeks confirmation bias, picking and choosing studies and data sets that support their narrative. That's how the world works.
Post by: Euclid on July 24, 2020, 02:44:15 PM
Invalid Tweet IDIs this satire?
HT: @hvaces42
Post by: ExGingi on July 24, 2020, 02:45:17 PM
Is this satire?
That's up to viewer discretion.
Post by: CountValentine on July 24, 2020, 02:49:23 PM
Is this satire?Sadly I would say no.
Post by: CountValentine on July 27, 2020, 01:21:54 PM
Post by: ExGingi on July 27, 2020, 01:47:13 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/those-face-masks-with-breathing-valves-they-arent-effective-doctors-say/ar-BB17727P?li=BBnb7Kz
I've got to love this. (didn't read the article, just the link). They will never give up on full and utmost control!
Post by: Mikes@Micro on July 27, 2020, 01:52:12 PM
I've got to love this. (didn't read the article, just the link). They will never give up on full and utmost control!Reportedly stores in Yerushalayim have signs up specifying the need for a n95 or kn95 without a valve.
Post by: CountValentine on July 27, 2020, 03:03:26 PM
I've got to love this. (didn't read the article, just the link). They will never give up on full and utmost control!It is called understanding how masks work. ;)
These are the type of N95 masks I had to wear.
Post by: ExGingi on July 27, 2020, 03:51:39 PM
It is called understanding how masks work. ;)
These are the type of N95 masks I had to wear.
It's called BS!
No one's enforcing what kind of face covering is worn or how it is worn, as long as you comply and have something there, no-one's going to really bother you.
Post by: neveryou on July 27, 2020, 04:18:31 PM
It's called BS!I was wearing a face shield in shul after the local health inspector said it was fine and someone in shul kept complaining to me and made the local health inspector reverse her decision bc he "felt" it doesnt protect like a mask does
No one's enforcing what kind of face covering is worn or how it is worn, as long as you comply and have something there, no-one's going to really bother you.
Ps. I've flown with the face shield and no one complained
Post by: Dan on July 27, 2020, 04:21:10 PM
face shieldhttps://www.dansdeals.com/more/dans-commentary/news-roundup/7-22-20-news-roundup-israel-flights-covid-19-thoughts-cuomo-aa-adding-flights-jetblue-ditching-long-beach-hertz-improvements-dot-complaint-elons-negative-fine/#COVID19_Thoughts
Post by: neveryou on July 27, 2020, 04:34:06 PM
https://www.dansdeals.com/more/dans-commentary/news-roundup/7-22-20-news-roundup-israel-flights-covid-19-thoughts-cuomo-aa-adding-flights-jetblue-ditching-long-beach-hertz-improvements-dot-complaint-elons-negative-fine/#COVID19_ThoughtsI only wear it to be yotzei zein
Post by: aygart on July 27, 2020, 04:38:27 PM
I only wear it to be yotzei zein
Your intent doesn't change that he is absolutely correct that it does not work as well.
Post by: neveryou on July 27, 2020, 04:40:07 PM
Your intent doesn't change that he is absolutely correct that it does not work as well.Well the local health inspector signed off on it, I calmly explained that to him and he still wasn't happy
Post by: aygart on July 27, 2020, 04:45:50 PM
Well the local health inspector signed off on it, I calmly explained that to him and he still wasn't happyThe facts are the facts. It was not his feeling that were counterfactual but yours.
Post by: neveryou on July 27, 2020, 04:50:32 PM
The facts are the facts. It was not his feeling that were counterfactual but yours.Actually it looked and sounded like he had alot of feelings
Post by: aygart on July 27, 2020, 05:17:52 PM
Actually it looked and sounded like he had alot of feelingsThe facts were on his side regardless.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on July 28, 2020, 10:22:32 AM
Post by: Zalc on July 28, 2020, 10:38:49 AM
I'm asking as someone who:
- has a beard, so most masks won't really help protect me
- is low-risk
- has antibodies
- has a recent negative test
- only wears a mask when asked to (indoors within 6 feet, or on a plane etc).
This would let me breathe fresh air while protecting those around me on the slim chance that I have Covid...
Post by: moish on July 28, 2020, 04:54:31 PM
Reportedly stores in Yerushalayim have signs up specifying the need for a n95 or kn95 without a valve.I haven't seen any that say that. In any event they should be more focused on people who wear their masks as chin straps.
The only time I had a problem wearing a valve was when trying to enter hospitals.
Post by: moish on July 28, 2020, 04:55:01 PM
Are there any masks with "reverse" valves that lets you inhale unfiltered and fresh air and only filters out exhalations (droplets etc).The mask inside out.
Post by: gozalim on July 29, 2020, 06:08:20 PM
when people make cloth masks with a logo etc. on it. where can I get that cheaply for a small quantity. (3-20)
wither someplace that custom prints them, or perhaps to get the logo on some kind of (transparent) iron-on and put them on target's $2 masks
any leads?
Post by: moish on August 01, 2020, 05:31:59 PM
https://unitedwithisrael.org/new-israeli-corona-mask-may-be-the-best-in-the-world/
(https://i.postimg.cc/257cs4tV/Viri-Mask-BLUE-Frontal-WEB-300x300.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Post by: Kobe Bryant on August 01, 2020, 09:50:20 PM
What will happen if I tried wearing this on a plane?Would not elicit a second glance.
https://unitedwithisrael.org/new-israeli-corona-mask-may-be-the-best-in-the-world/
(https://i.postimg.cc/257cs4tV/Viri-Mask-BLUE-Frontal-WEB-300x300.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Post by: ExGingi on August 03, 2020, 09:21:19 PM
Post by: Lurker on August 08, 2020, 09:11:27 PM
Post by: ExGingi on August 12, 2020, 09:17:51 AM
đź’Ž Is this the most expensive mask in the world?
— Bloomberg Quicktake (@Quicktake) August 12, 2020
A jeweler in Israel is making a $1.5 million #Covid19 face mask, complete with 18-karat white gold and 3,600 diamonds pic.twitter.com/l8h0La5KzT
Someone is trying to outdo the Indian gold mask.
Post by: ExGingi on August 13, 2020, 08:52:02 AM
Someone needs to try this and see what AA says.
What will happen if I tried wearing this on a plane?
https://unitedwithisrael.org/new-israeli-corona-mask-may-be-the-best-in-the-world/
(https://i.postimg.cc/257cs4tV/Viri-Mask-BLUE-Frontal-WEB-300x300.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Post by: Lurker on August 26, 2020, 01:54:45 PM
https://www.foxnews.com/health/half-masking-coronavirus-risk-study
Quote
“It’s like wearing your pants with only one leg in," Dr. Frederick Davis, associate chair of emergency medicine at Northwell Health/Long Island Jewish Hospital in New York, told Fox News. “A mask, or other face covering, should cover both your mouth and nose."
Post by: Ergel on August 26, 2020, 01:56:00 PM
Nothing groundbreaking here:Except the headline which says it "may increase risk" which would imply that it's worse than not wearing a mask at all. But then the article doesn't say anything to that effect
https://www.foxnews.com/health/half-masking-coronavirus-risk-study
Post by: Lurker on August 26, 2020, 01:58:14 PM
Except the headline which says it "may increase risk" which would imply that it's worse than not wearing a mask at all. But then the article doesn't say anything to that effect
Oh, you mean Fox employed fake news as clickbait?
Nothing groundbreaking here
Post by: Naftuli19 on August 26, 2020, 03:34:37 PM
Post by: aygart on August 26, 2020, 03:38:22 PM
Except the headline which says it "may increase risk" which would imply that it's worse than not wearing a mask at all. But then the article doesn't say anything to that effectIf it makes you breathe through your nose more then it adds risk.
Post by: avromie7 on August 26, 2020, 03:46:37 PM
If it makes you breathe through your nose more then it adds risk.FWIU the nose works like a filter, so breathing thru the nose should slow the spread.
Post by: aygart on August 26, 2020, 03:48:03 PM
FWIU the nose works like a filter, so breathing thru the nose should slow the spread.Doesn't seem like you read the article.
Post by: Ergel on August 26, 2020, 05:15:23 PM
Doesn't seem like you read the article.Shocking
Post by: good sam on August 27, 2020, 01:48:54 PM
Post by: lcm on August 27, 2020, 03:19:43 PM
Where can one obtain a few n95 masks?There have been a few ads for some on DDMS
Post by: ExGingi on August 27, 2020, 04:40:34 PM
Heys guys. Not to start any argument but i found this....👇
— Matt6767 (@Matt67wolf) August 27, 2020
Please read. The NEJM is highly respected by doctors and scientists. 🤔 pic.twitter.com/foK52NoSmq
Post by: aygart on August 27, 2020, 04:44:54 PM
Is there a link to the entire article or is this just the first sentences while the remainder discussesHeys guys. Not to start any argument but i found this....👇
— Matt6767 (@Matt67wolf) August 27, 2020
Please read. The NEJM is highly respected by doctors and scientists. 🤔 pic.twitter.com/foK52NoSmq
Post by: ExGingi on August 27, 2020, 05:19:27 PM
Is there a link to the entire article or is this just the first sentences while the remainder discusses
I posted without any comment, so I didn't really read much more or research it.
GIYF and comes up with https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372
But TBH what really made me post this was the phrase "a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic". I think this is very profound and might be indicative of many if not most or all government reactions to any hint of crisis, be it health, law and order, finance, etc. etc.
I need to think this through, but my initial thoughts are that policy moves are one of two kinds - either a power grab or a reflextive reaction to anxiety over a crisis (or hint thereof).
Post by: biscotti on August 27, 2020, 06:33:20 PM
Heys guys. Not to start any argument but i found this....👇
— Matt6767 (@Matt67wolf) August 27, 2020
Please read. The NEJM is highly respected by doctors and scientists. 🤔 pic.twitter.com/foK52NoSmq
June 3 follow-up from the authors of that letter: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836 (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836)
TO THE EDITOR:
We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4
We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.
Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H.
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Post by: good sam on August 27, 2020, 07:27:24 PM
There have been a few ads for some on DDMSOrdered thanks. Still selling for $10 a piece with shipping.
Post by: aygart on August 27, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Post by: Euclid on August 27, 2020, 11:32:16 PM
Heard from a Rov in the name of an infectious diseases Dr in his kehila that he is seeing staph infections coming from reusing masks too much.Which type of masks? How could someone get a staph infection from a mask??
Post by: aygart on August 27, 2020, 11:59:11 PM
Which type of masks? How could someone get a staph infection from a mask??But sure but guessing cloth masks which get staph in the organic matter caught in them.
Post by: Euclid on August 28, 2020, 12:01:29 AM
But sure but guessing cloth masks which get staph in the organic matter caught in them.Interesting. Don't think I've ever washed my ski facemask and my scarves. (That's probably a disgusting admission ;) )
Post by: aygart on August 28, 2020, 12:12:25 AM
Interesting. Don't think I've ever washed my ski facemask and my scarves. (That's probably a disgusting admission ;) )Neither is anything close to the same scale
Post by: Euclid on August 28, 2020, 12:13:34 AM
Neither is anything close to the same scale100%. Was an observation I just had - never even thought about how germy they probably are.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on August 28, 2020, 08:11:32 AM
Which type of masks? How could someone get a staph infection from a mask??Reusing masks. Same reason why disposable bags came back within a week of being banned in NY.
Post by: moko on August 28, 2020, 12:21:48 PM
June 3 follow-up from the authors of that letter: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836 (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836)worth a mention that Dr Klompass is an ehrliche frum doctor who regularly davens at an outdoor tent minyan WITH MASKS
TO THE EDITOR:
We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)1 as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.4
We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods.
Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H.
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Post by: etech0 on August 28, 2020, 12:24:10 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/HkgVDFFR/Screenshot-20200828-111834-Linked-In.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/svTV5Hj4)
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 01, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
Post by: Lurker on September 01, 2020, 10:09:28 PM
This has nothing to do with masks and everything to do with hypocritical politicians thinking that they are special.
Post by: biscotti on September 01, 2020, 10:42:48 PM
Totally owned the libs! At least Trump was consistent in refusing to tell the public to wear masks until July 21, one of many failures that resulted in rampant spread of the virus and thousands of preventable deaths.
Which is it, Pelosi? Were you lying about the importance of wearing masks or were you incapable of following your own agenda?
Either way, I'll take a person who failed to prevent thousands of deaths over a hypocrite like Pelosi any day!
Post by: S209 on September 01, 2020, 10:47:35 PM
Totally owned the libs! At least Trump was consistent in refusing to tell the public to wear masks until July 21, one of many failures that resulted in rampant spread of the virus and thousands of preventable deaths.Loving how many new members earn their stripes on the Coronavirus board
Which is it, Pelosi? Were you lying about the importance of wearing masks or were you incapable of following your own agenda?
Either way, I'll take a person who failed to prevent thousands of deaths over a hypocrite like Pelosi any day!
Post by: Lurker on September 01, 2020, 10:50:46 PM
Loving how many new members earn their stripes on the Coronavirus board
@biscotti has already been accused of being a CV clone and perpetually making @YitzyS crave carbs, and also being a flaming liberal. This cat's stripes have been painted already.
Post by: Euclid on September 01, 2020, 10:53:05 PM
@biscotti has already been accused of being a CV clone and perpetually making @YitzyS crave carbs, and also being a flaming liberal. This cat's stripes have been painted already.Pretty sure all Covid believers have been "exposed" as CV clones at least once.
Post by: S209 on September 01, 2020, 10:54:13 PM
@biscotti has already been accused of being a CV clone and perpetually making @YitzyS crave carbs, and also being a flaming liberal. This cat's stripes have been painted already.His frum credentials have also been questioned, but then
@biscotti has already been accused of being a CV clone
Post by: Lurker on September 01, 2020, 10:56:07 PM
Pretty sure all Covid believers have been "exposed" as CV clones at least once.
The trick to avoid that is to argue with him incessantly.
Post by: aygart on September 01, 2020, 10:58:53 PM
Totally owned the libs! At least Trump was consistent in refusing to tell the public to wear masks until July 21, one of many failures that resulted in rampant spread of the virus and thousands of preventable deaths.
Which is it, Pelosi? Were you lying about the importance of wearing masks or were you incapable of following your own agenda?
Either way, I'll take a person who failed to prevent thousands of deaths over a hypocrite like Pelosi any day!
What does Trump have to do with this? How do his failures change anything about Pelosi?
Some here would give this one a "But officer he was speeding too"
I'm sure you do understand that the hypocrisy of many politicians in supporting protests but disallowing religious gatherings is probably the biggest contributor to all restrictions falling apart.
Post by: Lurker on September 01, 2020, 11:03:31 PM
What does Trump have to do with this? How do his failures change anything about Pelosi?
Some here would give this one a "But officer he was speeding too"
I'm sure you do understand that the hypocrisy of many politicians in supporting protests but disallowing religious gatherings is probably the biggest contributor to all restrictions falling apart.
+1, but got a like for the great sarcasm. Trump and Pelosi will spend plenty of time together in the hot place. There are no saints here.
Don't look now, but yet another thread turned political and no one can blame @CountValentine.
Post by: biscotti on September 01, 2020, 11:21:58 PM
What does Trump have to do with this? How do his failures change anything about Pelosi?
Some here would give this one a "But officer he was speeding too"
I'm sure you do understand that the hypocrisy of many politicians in supporting protests but disallowing religious gatherings is probably the biggest contributor to all restrictions falling apart.
The video was posted on youtube... by Donald Trump. That's why he's relevant. It's intended to own the libs and gain support, and to make people feel better about voting for him. But intelligent viewers might realize that the damage caused Pelosi's hypocrisy pales in comparison to the damage caused by his incompetence.
Of course Pelosi was stupid and hypocritical. But people watch this and think Trump is on the right side of the coronavirus and Pelosi is on the wrong side. And that's what bothers me - it takes so much blindness and delusion and just general disbelief of reality to believe that's the case.
@Lurker it was political before I made it political.
Post by: Lurker on September 01, 2020, 11:32:28 PM
@Lurker it was political before I made it political.
Noted before you commented:
This has nothing to do with masks and everything to do with hypocritical politicians thinking that they are special.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 02, 2020, 10:25:21 AM
This has nothing to do with masks and everything to do with hypocritical politicians thinking that they are special.Correct.
Post by: S209 on September 02, 2020, 08:26:05 PM
https://covid19ch.blogspot.com/2020/09/covid-19-update-40.html
@Yard sale
Quote
Wearing a mask. Much has been said pro and against, however this is not a political/social issue but a medical one. It is clear that if all parties wear masks at all times in public there will be reduced spread of the virus. It is also true that for many, mask wearing is bothersome and seems pointless. Presented with rational guidelines perhaps smart mask wearing will take place.
All those that are vulnerable should wear a mask when in any public forum (except when walking down a quiet sidewalk, where the possible obstruction to vision may outweigh the minimal benefits). In addition to whatever degree the mask is protective, it also serves as a sign to others that you are vulnerable.
Everyone, including those who have had the illness, when in close social contact with strangers (not immediate family) should wear a mask. This is most helpful in the event that one is unbeknownst to themselves possibly infectious.
In any crowded indoor setting where close social contact is unavoidable, one should wear a mask. At simchas and large gatherings of people, even outdoors, masks should be worn.
One who is in quarantine but who needs to go out for essential purposes must be strict with themselves to wear a mask at all times in public, and not engage socially with others.
Post by: HappyJulie on September 03, 2020, 07:57:08 AM
It's a pity that there always have to be fights about it, although everybody just wants to be healthy, isn't it?
Post by: S209 on September 04, 2020, 11:02:00 AM
You can't do justice to anyone in any way. If I say, I am supporting masks, then you will be criticized, just as when I say, I am against masks.If all agree that masks are helpful, but inconvenient, and the side that is pro masks chooses to inconvenience themselves as a sacrifice and gets upset at others for not doing so and the side that is anti masks chooses not to inconvenience themselves as a sacrifice and gets upset at others for doing so, then the 2 sides seem a bit lopsided
It's a pity that there always have to be fights about it, although everybody just wants to be healthy, isn't it?
Post by: aygart on September 04, 2020, 01:31:25 PM
You can't do justice to anyone in any way. If I say, I am supporting masks, then you will be criticized, just as when I say, I am against masks.Some just want to be healthy and some just don't want to be uncomfortable.
It's a pity that there always have to be fights about it, although everybody just wants to be healthy, isn't it?
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 04, 2020, 04:07:23 PM
If all agree that masks are helpful, but inconvenient, and the side that is pro masks chooses to inconvenience themselves as a sacrifice and gets upset at others for not doing so and the side that is anti masks chooses not to inconvenience themselves as a sacrifice and gets upset at others for doing so, then the 2 sides seem a bit lopsidedI'm not aware of anyone who is upset at others who choose to wear masks.
Post by: Euclid on September 04, 2020, 04:09:51 PM
I'm not aware of anyone who is upset at others who choose to wear masks.Heard/seen many "you're causing panic/anxiety when wearing a mask in public" comments (on DDF and other places, including IRL.)
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 04, 2020, 04:25:20 PM
Heard/seen many "you're causing panic/anxiety when wearing a mask in public" comments (on DDF and other places, including IRL.)That is asinine.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 04, 2020, 04:25:50 PM
Heard/seen many "you're causing panic/anxiety when wearing a mask in public" comments (on DDF and other places, including IRL.)Can you point to a post?
Post by: yitzgar on September 04, 2020, 04:43:47 PM
Can you point to a post?IIRC it was posted with regard to mask mandates, rather than individuals wearing them
Post by: Euclid on September 04, 2020, 04:52:50 PM
Can you point to a post?Here's a DDF one that I found quickly. There are plenty more.
https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=118184.msg2295828#msg2295828
Also check out TLS and Hefkervelt comments.
Post by: Lurker on September 07, 2020, 10:43:54 AM
Post by: S209 on September 07, 2020, 11:26:53 AM
I'm not aware of anyone who is upset at others who choose to wear masks.You need to get out more ;)
Post by: gozalim on September 07, 2020, 01:03:45 PM
You need to get out more ;)IME those who feel tiny bit guilty themselves about it
(e.g. it's always the guy without antibodies)
Post by: good sam on September 07, 2020, 01:13:42 PM
You need to get out more ;)
IME those who feel tiny bit guilty themselves about itThere are those that say it is daas torah to not wear a mask. Don't shoot the messenger.
(e.g. it's always the guy without antibodies)
Post by: gozalim on September 07, 2020, 01:25:06 PM
There are those that say it is daas torah to not wear a mask. Don't shoot the messenger.I haven't experienced those.
(in my circles talk radio is qouted as own opinion, or fact, not blamed on torah)
Post by: S209 on September 07, 2020, 08:27:00 PM
There are those that say it is daas torah to not wear a mask. Don't shoot the messenger.Curious. What would be the problem with wearing a mask? Chukas hagoyim?
Post by: good sam on September 07, 2020, 10:06:01 PM
Curious. What would be the problem with wearing a mask? Chukas hagoyim?I would gladly explain it if I understood it. I can put you in touch with the rov of my shul if you'd like.
Post by: S209 on September 07, 2020, 10:22:19 PM
I would gladly explain it if I understood it. I can put you in touch with the rov of my shul if you'd like.Dexter Park?
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 07, 2020, 11:58:49 PM
You need to get out more ;)I believe I get out plenty, lol (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=17387.0)
Post by: Lurker on September 09, 2020, 01:36:50 PM
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-020-06067-8
Quote
Masks Do More Than Protect Others During COVID-19: Reducing the Inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 to Protect the Wearer
Post by: chevron on September 13, 2020, 02:20:21 AM
I honestly maintain that anyone with an objection to masks during davening just wishes they could talk.
Sure it fogs up my glasses so I take them off, it's a shul not a movie theater.
Post by: aygart on September 13, 2020, 02:25:45 AM
.Meh.
I honestly maintain that anyone with an objection to masks during davening just wishes they could talk.
.
Post by: neveryou on September 13, 2020, 02:44:47 AM
Post by: Yard sale on September 13, 2020, 03:47:59 AM
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 13, 2020, 07:19:12 AM
Kn 95 during selichos,personally I found standing to be more uncomfortable.You are so virtuous. We all aspire to be like you.
I honestly maintain that anyone with an objection to masks during davening just wishes they could talk.
Sure it fogs up my glasses so I take them off, it's a shul not a movie theater.
Post by: yitzgar on September 13, 2020, 08:02:14 AM
https://www.redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/09/10/the-cdc-accidentally-admits-cloth-masks-are-not-effective/This is ridiculous. Everyone knows that most masks don't offer much protection to the wearer
Post by: Lurker on September 13, 2020, 08:30:50 AM
https://www.redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/09/10/the-cdc-accidentally-admits-cloth-masks-are-not-effective/
This is ridiculous. Everyone knows that most masks don't offer much protection to the wearer
This is not the first time this sorry excuse for a blog has been quoted on here. At least CNN has some actual facts and real news mixed in with their analysis and strong left opinions. The quoted blog has a history of distorting and misrepresenting facts, cherry picking quotes and data to sell their agenda. No one should rely on them for anything other than confirmation punditry of their already hard-right bias.
Post by: neveryou on September 13, 2020, 08:43:59 AM
This is not the first time this sorry excuse for a blog has been quoted on here. At least CNN has some actual facts and real news mixed in with their analysis and strong left opinions. The quoted blog has a history of distorting and misrepresenting facts, cherry picking quotes and data to sell their agenda. No one should rely on them for anything other than confirmation punditry of their already hard-right bias.What do they write that's wrong in this article?
Post by: Lurker on September 13, 2020, 08:46:56 AM
What do they write that's wrong in this article?
Start with the headline? The CDC didn't "accidentally admit" anything. Everyone has been very clear about what cloth masks can and can't do.
Post by: Essen est zich on September 13, 2020, 09:38:37 AM
– The Gedaliah Society, in conjunction with Dr. Rosen
This Content Was Published at https://collive.com/coronavirus-update-42-time-to-restart-porch-minyanim-due-to-multiple-new-covid-cases/
Post by: Essen est zich on September 13, 2020, 09:47:24 AM
Close contact is defined as within 6 feet for 10 minutes, regardless of mask use.)
Post by: Yard sale on September 13, 2020, 10:39:03 AM
https://mishpacha.com/the-kichels
Miriam Rivka (Adler) Rozen 1 WEEK AGO EmailPrint Reply
While I don’t generally read the Mishpacha Magazine each week, I have to say, that when I do have time to read, I enjoy it and I feel that it is an excellent publication. Like many people, the first feature I turn to, is The Kichels. Unfortunately, the comic from two weeks ago didn’t leave me chuckling; I felt offended and angry. I am referring to the episode where not one character was wearing a mask correctly.
I have been an acute care nurse in a really lovely community hospital in Valley Stream, Long Island, NY for over twenty years. Most of those years, I have worked, and continue to work in critical care (ICU). My hospital was one of those in the New York metropolitan area that witnessed some of the worst COVID numbers. When I hear statements like, “oh, it’s political”, or “it’s a hoax”, or “they starved my family member”, and “they didn’t let us visit, those rotten nurses/doctors” I think of one thing: We have surveillance cameras on us constantly. Pull all of the hospital’s surveillance cameras and publicize them for the world to see what actually happened in the hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Allow me to give you a glimpse.
The average 12-hour shift became a 14-hour shift. Nurses didn’t go to the bathroom, nurses didn’t eat, nurses didn’t sit, and nurses often couldn’t find time to have a drink of water. I stopped bringing lunch to work, because I found myself throwing it away, uneaten, at the end of my shift. Nurses literally spent all day keeping people alive; monitoring continuous vital signs (temperatures, blood pressure, pulse and heart rate and rhythms, respirations, and oxygen saturation), and treating them almost as often, treating the sick with multiple lifesaving drips (the average patient had 5-8 life-supporting IV medications that needed to be changed very often), monitoring blood sugars, monitoring ventilator (respirator) support, drawing blood and lab work and then treating abnormal values, and, of course, speaking to families and providing emotional support.
The ICU that I work in has 16 beds. During the pandemic, there were over 30 patients each day. Nurses who usually cared for two critical patients each day had to care for three or four patients at a time. That lasted for about six-seven weeks. Not to mention the additional 10 or so critical patients who were in the ER each day because the main ICU didn’t have enough beds to hold them.
Most of the days I was assigned to work in a makeshift ICU. It was like a field hospital. Supplies were scarce. PPE (personal protective equipment) was scarce at times. Our N-95 masks that we were accustomed to throwing away after previously going into a negative pressure room (those used for TB and other airborne diseases), were suddenly a rare commodity. Even if one broke, our manager told us to staple it back together.
I remember wondering if we were all going to be dead in a few weeks, considering that it seemed that the Malach HaMaves had literally set up shop in my unit. Could you, dear friends and readers, understand that thought? You surely cannot imagine what life was like for the healthcare workers who went to work each day to care for your family members. We put our lives on the line.
Nurses asked shailos about pikuach nefesh. Were they allowed to pick up extra shifts, when asked, to help out their strained colleagues? I have a colleague who did not see his infant for 51 days. Another colleague, a young, new nurse, moved out of her high risk parents’ home. We worried that we were bringing the disease home to our children, spouses, siblings, and parents. Many nurses wrote wills for the first time.
Oftentimes, in the past few months, as I walked in my neighborhood with my mask, I wanted to wear a sign that said, “I worked in the ICU (or ER) yesterday. Would you want to inhale my germs?” My mask protects you and your mask protects me. There is nothing comical about this. I work with many talented doctors who live and breathe a website called “up to date.” They read every single published report related to COVID-19. Even they are shocked at the virulence of this disease. And these experts advise to continue wearing masks and maintaining social distance.
In addition, I feel it is our ethical and moral obligation to be mekadesh sheim Shamayim by doing the very small act of wearing a mask. When I am standing and caring for a patient, I am embarrassed to see and hear news reports about the new COVID cases coming from our communities, from these super-spreader events like chasunos and other such gatherings. How am I to respond to my fellow nurses and doctors when they question me about our communities’ poor COVID habits?
Why does my family have to endure “mask shaming”? Why have my children had their masks pulled off their faces? Do the rules and laws only apply to me? Come on, Klal Yisrael, we can do this. It’s Elul. Can we just wear our masks and practice social distancing? Can we just do it to protect our healthcare workers who have to wear masks for an entire shift multiple times during the week?
I believe we can. We can put our personal yegios aside, we can put our discomfort aside, and we can say we love our brothers and sisters in Klal Yisrael, and we are doing it for them. And we can do our part in preventing the spread of COVID-19.
Wishing everyone a Kesiva Vechasima Tova and a Gut Gebentsht Yahr,
Post by: chevron on September 13, 2020, 01:56:17 PM
Im the last person to conform, I mean when my father said do this, I didn't, when he said don't do it, I did.
The author aharon applebaum wrote a book called badenheim 1939. I feel like "the grand budapest hotel" is based on the book.
In the book, he describes the anti Jewish laws and the German authorities as "the sanitation department"
Masks are, in my opinion, the best way for society to function at this time.
It's not a test if we, as a society, will just do what we are told.
I certainly understand the opposition by people in that sense but getting lazy?
Doctors can do a 12 hour surgery wearing a mask and you can't pray in it for a few hours?
Post by: chevron on September 13, 2020, 02:03:04 PM
He replied , no, He pretty much wears a mask the entire day from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Post by: ExGingi on September 13, 2020, 02:05:57 PM
Asked a friend who is a surgeon "Do you find wearing a mask uncomfortable during a long surgery?"
He replied , no, He pretty much wears a mask the entire day from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
One can get used to almost anything.
Some people might consider wearing wool טלית קטן uncomfortable. For many it's second nature, they would feel like they're missing something without it.
Post by: chevron on September 13, 2020, 02:20:40 PM
You are so virtuous. We all aspire to be like you.
I'm honest, I was bored during selichos
Post by: chevron on September 13, 2020, 02:22:22 PM
One can get used to almost anything.
Some people might consider wearing wool טלית קטן uncomfortable. For many it's second nature, they would feel like they're missing something without it.
We discussed this endlessly in the lakewood thread, I think people who wear a towel around their neck in summer in ch to go to mikvah are nuts..
Shaitel, long dress, tights
Beard, tiztzis, hat, jacket.
All of these things in my opinion are infinitely more uncomfortable than wearing a mask indoors
Post by: Yard sale on September 13, 2020, 11:54:41 PM
הסקופים בפרסום ר×שון: הרה"×’ משה ש×ול קליין בפסק × ×’×“ ע×יית מסכות: "×ś× ×¨×•×ים חילוק ×‘× ×“×‘×§×™×ť בין החוגים הלובשים מסכה ל×לה של×. מי ×©×ś× ×ž×§×¤×™×“ ×ś× ×ž×§×¤×™×“×™×ť עליו. ×‘×¤×¨× ×‘×–×ž×ź תפילה ולימוד שזה מפריע, שלוחי מצווה ××™× ×ť × ×™×–×•×§×™×ť. pic.twitter.com/XD2gWVSzpr
— חדשות הסקופים. (@Haskupim) September 13, 2020
Post by: NTorch on September 15, 2020, 11:49:24 AM
Quote
ואכן בדקתי והתברר לי בבירור שאין בהדבקת המסכה כל שינוי בקול
השופר. ואכן ראוי בכל בית כנסת שצריך לנהוג בדרך זו לבדוק אם יש בזה שינוי בקול השופר
https://7d4ab068-0603-408d-89df-fac4580e17c4.filesusr.com/ugd/8b9b1c_ba52693df4c845cda77be45f220c040a.pdf at p.18
I have yet to see this done in practice, but it is interesting.
Post by: avromie7 on September 15, 2020, 11:52:46 AM
Rav Asher Weiss on putting a mask on the ShofarI heard in STL they use a mask on the shofar. At this point it's a minhag so it's a lot simpler.
https://7d4ab068-0603-408d-89df-fac4580e17c4.filesusr.com/ugd/8b9b1c_ba52693df4c845cda77be45f220c040a.pdf at p.18
I have yet to see this done in practice, but it is interesting.
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 12:07:05 PM
If anyone is in close contact with someone who is considered contagious according to the above criteria, they need to quarantine. (Close contact is defined as within 6 feet for 10 minutes, regardless of mask use.)
– The Gedaliah Society, in conjunction with Dr. Rosen
WRONG WRONG and WRONG AGAIN. The CDC does not specify the implications of mask use in regards to the need to quarantine.
MD Anderson states explicitly:
"What constitutes close contact and what constitutes exposure to the coronavirus?
Close contact to COVID-19 occurs when you are within six feet of someone who is showing symptoms of COVID-19, for at least 15 minutes, when neither person is wearing a mask, and the infected person later tests positive for the coronavirus...If either or both individuals were wearing face masks, it is not considered exposure."
https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/what-counts-as-coronavirus-covid-19-exposure--how-does-contact-tracing-identify-who-has-been-exposed-to-covid-19.h00-159383523.html
Post by: aygart on September 15, 2020, 12:14:13 PM
or the vaguely identified Dr. Rosen made this statementI presume that those in CH would not consider him to be vaguely identified.
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 12:32:50 PM
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 12:35:43 PM
WRONG WRONG and WRONG AGAIN. The CDC does not specify the implications of mask use in regards to the need to quarantine. If the Gedaliah Society or the vaguely identified Dr. Rosen made this statement, they/he are highly suspect on all their guidance.
1) Dr. Rosen has been a community doctor in CH for decades. He's is very well known in their circles. The Gedaliah Society and Dr. Rosen are giving advice to that specific community, and that community alone.
2) I'd put Dr. Rosen's track record with this pandemic up against the CDC's in a heartbeat. The CDC has been a political pawn from the very beginning. It's been very well documented, culminating with a FOX News report the other day confirming that all CDC messaging is run through the White House now.
3) It is very likely that the CDC's guidelines are assuming the use of N95 masks. Most masks that people use are not enough to completely guarantee that transmission will not occur when one sustains contact in close quarters with a contagious individual.
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 01:38:12 PM
The Gedaliah Society and Dr. Rosen are giving advice to that specific community, and that community alone.
Wrong! The update from the Gedaliah Society includes a definition of 'close contact' requiring quarantine. This definition was not offered as a community specific definition. Why defend inaccurate public health information?
It is very likely that the CDC's guidelines are assuming the use of N95 masks.
Wrong! The guidelines defining 'close contact' are from MD Anderson, not the CDC. It is purely wishful thinking to suggest that general guidelines presented on a World-renowned medical institution's website refers to N95 masks when the majority of the general public does not use N95s.
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 01:53:54 PM
Wrong! The update from the Gedaliah Society includes a definition of 'close contact' requiring quarantine. This definition was not offered as a community specific definition. Why defend inaccurate public health information?
All published Gedaliah Society guidelines are for the CH community. Just because you read it on DDF doesn't mean it's for you.
Wrong! The guidelines defining 'close contact' are from MD Anderson, not the CDC. It is purely wishful thinking to suggest that general guidelines presented on a World-renowned medical institution's website refers to N95 masks when the majority of the general public does not use N95s.
So this world renowned medical institution just issued a blanket guideline, all the while knowing that there are tens, if not hundreds, of different quality masks in use with a wide degree of efficiency? Or did they specify which masks they were referring to?
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 02:07:17 PM
All published Gedaliah Society guidelines are for the CH community. Just because you read it on DDF doesn't mean it's for you.
A definition is a definition and not community specific - I went to source to read it in context. Wrong Public Health Information is wrong. Why defend it?
So this world renowned medical institution just issued a blanket guideline, all the while knowing that there are tens, if not hundreds, of different quality masks in use with a wide degree of efficiency?
Exactly. They as all of us know that there are different levels of protection provided by masks and how they are worn. They provide "blanket guidelines", just as Johns Hopkins and Mayo Clinic does on their websites, meant for the general public doing things the general public does. There is no logical reason to assume they are only referring specifically to N95 wearers.
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 02:13:02 PM
A definition is a definition and not community specific - I went to source to read it in context. Wrong Public Health Information is wrong. Why defend it?
Exactly. They as all of us know that there are different levels of protection provided by masks and how they are worn. They provide "blanket guidelines", just as Johns Hopkins and Mayo Clinic does on their websites, meant for the general public doing things the general public does. There is no logical reason to assume they are only referring specifically to N95 wearers.
So your understanding is that someone who is wearing a neck gaiter and is within 6 feet of a contagious person who isn't wearing any mask for 10 minutes, they are not considered exposed?
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 02:25:43 PM
WRONG WRONG and WRONG AGAIN. The CDC does not specify the implications of mask use in regards to the need to quarantine.
MD Anderson states explicitly:
"What constitutes close contact and what constitutes exposure to the coronavirus?
Close contact to COVID-19 occurs when you are within six feet of someone who is showing symptoms of COVID-19, for at least 15 minutes, when neither person is wearing a mask, and the infected person later tests positive for the coronavirus...If either or both individuals were wearing face masks, it is not considered exposure."
https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/what-counts-as-coronavirus-covid-19-exposure--how-does-contact-tracing-identify-who-has-been-exposed-to-covid-19.h00-159383523.html
For the record, 10 minutes within 6 feet is in line with UPenn's definition of medium-risk exposure. They also define a high-risk exposure as being "exposed to aerosolized secretions from an infected patient without recommended respiratory protection."
https://www.med.upenn.edu/PennMedicineTogether/covid-19-exposure/
Post by: NTorch on September 15, 2020, 02:29:34 PM
For the record, 10 minutes within 6 feet is in line with UPenn's definition of medium-risk exposure. They also define a high-risk exposure as being "exposed to aerosolized secretions from an infected patient without recommended respiratory protection."
https://www.med.upenn.edu/PennMedicineTogether/covid-19-exposure/
Someone recommends respiratory protection?
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 03:30:35 PM
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 04:07:34 PM
The Penn Medical website is specifically addressing its health professional employees and is in the context of their institutionally prescribed levels of isolation and quarantining which are not relevant to the general public. The exposure being addressed by respiratory protection is for instance during a tracheotomy procedure.
We can dance around this forever, but they still aren't wrong in the guidance. Not that I'm a fan of CDC guidelines, but this is buried as an asterisk on their site:
Quote
Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of time that constitutes a prolonged exposure. Recommendations vary on the length of time of exposure, but 15 minutes of close exposure can be used as an operational definition. Brief interactions are less likely to result in transmission; however, symptoms and the type of interaction (e.g., did the infected person cough directly into the face of the exposed individual) remain important.
If the Gedaliah Society prefers to issue guidance that leans towards the more cautious side, that doesn't warrant a
WRONG WRONG and WRONG AGAIN.
Post by: Euclid on September 15, 2020, 04:10:45 PM
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 04:31:01 PM
We can dance around this forever, but they still aren't wrong in the guidance. If the Gedaliah Society prefers to issue guidance that leans towards the more cautious side, that doesn't warrant a
You are obfuscating the issues. The science is clear that if the COVID-positive or bystander is wearing a mask then quarantine is not mandated. The Gedaliah Society definition of exposure requiring quarantine is wrong.
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 04:52:40 PM
You are obfuscating the issues. The science is clear that if the COVID-positive or bystander is wearing a mask then quarantine is not mandated. The Gedaliah Society definition of exposure requiring quarantine is wrong.
They get to set the definition at it pertains to their guidance ONLY. That is what they did. And their guidance falls within currently accepted medical protocols.
Post by: Afrages6 on September 15, 2020, 06:39:03 PM
You are obfuscating the issues. The science is clear that if the COVID-positive or bystander is wearing a mask then quarantine is not mandated. The Gedaliah Society definition of exposure requiring quarantine is wrong.CDC says otherwise
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 08:10:48 PM
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 08:13:11 PM
Where? @ Lurker quoted from the CDC referring to the length of time that constitutes an exposure. Where does CDC state that an exposure includes someone wearing a mask in close proximity to an infected person?
Quote
Note: This is irrespective of whether the person with COVID-19 or the contact was wearing a mask or whether the contact was wearing respiratory personal protective equipment (PPE)
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 15, 2020, 08:22:50 PM
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 08:28:04 PM
Thank you for clarifying that. Apparently MD Anderson does not agree with that.
Honestly, I was pretty shocked at their blanket statement given all we know about the various masks being used around this country. It doesn't match up with any other guidance I've seen published.
Post by: Euclid on September 15, 2020, 08:29:58 PM
Honestly, I was pretty shocked at their blanket statement given all we know about the various masks being used around this country. It doesn't match up with any other guidance I've seen published.I'm wondering if it's because they assume that many people aren't wearing their masks correctly (no nose/chin).
Post by: username on September 15, 2020, 08:45:51 PM
(and a link would be helpful)
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 08:46:32 PM
I'm wondering if it's because they assume that many people aren't wearing their masks correctly (no nose/chin).
Then their guidance makes even less sense. It would seem that they are assuming the opposite - that everyone is wearing top quality masks and wearing them correctly.
Post by: Euclid on September 15, 2020, 08:47:28 PM
Then their guidance makes even less sense. It would seem that they are assuming the opposite - that everyone is wearing top quality masks and wearing them correctly.Oops. Misunderstood your comment. Thought you were talking about Gedaliah Society statement.
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 08:47:41 PM
Per the CDC, what is the ruling of close contact with someone with the virus, but the ill person was wearing a mask?
(and a link would be helpful)
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/public-health-recommendations.html
Post by: Lurker on September 15, 2020, 08:48:51 PM
Oops. Misunderstood your comment. Thought you were talking about Gedaliah Society statement.
Yes, they most likely are issuing stricter guidance because they know how many low quality masks are being utilized and how many people aren't using masks correctly.
Post by: aygart on September 16, 2020, 11:59:49 AM
[/url]CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield makes it as clear as he can: "This face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine." pic.twitter.com/Ul0Ppj5qqv
— The Recount (@therecount) September 16, 2020
Post by: Jerseysteve on September 16, 2020, 02:28:26 PM
(https://mobile.twitter.com/therecount/status/1306257291726016514)Another indication how politicized this whole topic has become.[/url]CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield makes it as clear as he can: "This face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine." pic.twitter.com/Ul0Ppj5qqv
— The Recount (@therecount) September 16, 2020
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 16, 2020, 04:19:47 PM
Post by: aygart on September 16, 2020, 04:22:18 PM
Please wear a mask FOREVERThat is what we are trying to avoid. You are making it difficult.
Post by: Jerseysteve on September 16, 2020, 04:29:48 PM
TY
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 16, 2020, 04:32:26 PM
Please wear a mask FOREVER
That is what we are trying to avoid. You are making it difficult.
How? The head of the CDC says masks are more effective and polls say (fill in the blank)% of the population won't take the vaccine even if approved. Isn't the end game to have masks be the norm for the foreseeable future?
Post by: avromie7 on September 16, 2020, 04:33:42 PM
I am asking for a freind with antibodies and has difficulty breathing with a mask. (please do not let this turn into a discussion about ethics and morals) Has anyone found a mask that will pass the מראית עין test on a plane but is fully breathable? Something 1 ply maybe with micro holes or other features that though it looks like a mask does not restrict breathing. He would prefer having something that looks like a mask over bring a letter from a doctor.I got one from five below that is really thin. You can also get a multi pack from costco.
TY
Post by: Jerseysteve on September 16, 2020, 04:46:30 PM
How? The head of the CDC says masks are more effective and polls say (fill in the blank)% of the population won't take the vaccine even if approved. Isn't the end game to have masks be the norm for the foreseeable future?I think that in a lot of places like Schools, Hospitals, Assisted living, nursing homes it will be mandated forcing huge segments of the population to take them.
Post by: aygart on September 16, 2020, 05:32:34 PM
I am asking for a freind with antibodies and has difficulty breathing with a mask. (please do not let this turn into a discussion about ethics and morals) Has anyone found a mask that will pass the מראית עין test on a plane but is fully breathable? Something 1 ply maybe with micro holes or other features that though it looks like a mask does not restrict breathing. He would prefer having something that looks like a mask over bring a letter from a doctor.Gaiter masks
TY
Post by: yuneeq on September 17, 2020, 11:36:02 PM
I am asking for a freind with antibodies and has difficulty breathing with a mask. (please do not let this turn into a discussion about ethics and morals) Has anyone found a mask that will pass the מראית עין test on a plane but is fully breathable? Something 1 ply maybe with micro holes or other features that though it looks like a mask does not restrict breathing. He would prefer having something that looks like a mask over bring a letter from a doctor.
TY
Rip out the inner layers of a 3 ply
Post by: EliJelly on September 21, 2020, 01:11:39 AM
Gaiter maskshttps://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/news/2020/09/20/spirit-passenger-wears-neck-gaiter-airline-reiterates-cdc-mask-policy/5844435002/
Post by: cmey on September 21, 2020, 04:54:39 AM
Post by: good sam on September 21, 2020, 05:20:08 AM
I have 2 relatives who are each in their low 70’s. One is constantly watching the news and is petrified of covid. She hardly leaves her home to socialize and is a nervous wreck. The other isolated a couple of months until they felt they had a bit of clarity. They looked at things with an open mind and decided that they would choose to live life. They compare is to going into a car etc and facing assumed risk like so many of life’s activities. They felt that going maskless was an acceptable risk as well. They did their research and take zinc and several other supplements prophylacticly, and wear masks only when stores mandate it. They say they are comfortable with their decision and accept the risk, which they do feel has been over hyped in general. They have lots of family ties in Israel and see the toll the lockdowns have taken and that has them convinced that they are making the right move.Is there an ending to this story? I hope it's a happy one.
Post by: aygart on September 21, 2020, 08:48:09 AM
I have 2 relatives who are each in their low 70’s. One is constantly watching the news and is petrified of covid. She hardly leaves her home to socialize and is a nervous wreck. The other isolated a couple of months until they felt they had a bit of clarity. They looked at things with an open mind and decided that they would choose to live life. They compare is to going into a car etc and facing assumed risk like so many of life’s activities. They felt that going maskless was an acceptable risk as well. They did their research and take zinc and several other supplements prophylacticly, and wear masks only when stores mandate it. They say they are comfortable with their decision and accept the risk, which they do feel has been over hyped in general. They have lots of family ties in Israel and see the toll the lockdowns have taken and that has them convinced that they are making the right move.Somehow you ignored the middle option.
Post by: cmey on September 21, 2020, 08:59:19 AM
Somehow you ignored the middle option.They know the option is there. They are making a conscious and informed decision to go back to life as normal as are many others. They have concluded that there is a degree of mass hysteria and hype in the media. They are focusing on what they perceive to be the actual risk, and making the decision to live life with that level of risk.
Post by: yuneeq on September 21, 2020, 08:59:54 AM
I have 2 relatives who are each in their low 70’s. One is constantly watching the news and is petrified of covid. She hardly leaves her home to socialize and is a nervous wreck. The other isolated a couple of months until they felt they had a bit of clarity. They looked at things with an open mind and decided that they would choose to live life. They compare is to going into a car etc and facing assumed risk like so many of life’s activities. They felt that going maskless was an acceptable risk as well. They did their research and take zinc and several other supplements prophylacticly, and wear masks only when stores mandate it. They say they are comfortable with their decision and accept the risk, which they do feel has been over hyped in general. They have lots of family ties in Israel and see the toll the lockdowns have taken and that has them convinced that they are making the right move.
That’s a problem when the “research” older people are presented consists mostly of fake news.
Post by: cmey on September 21, 2020, 09:39:58 AM
That’s a problem when the “research” older people are presented consists mostly of fake news.They are not Trumpers. They did a tremendous amount of research (they have the time to do it) and actually spoke to a couple of experts in the field. The came to the conclusion that there is hysteria and overreaction given the facts at hand. I’m sure there are others who have looked at the numbers and concluded that they want to take precautions, ranging from mild trade offs to full blown isolation. But I don’t think they are off base with their decision.
You do realize that even NY state which was hit hard had some 32,000 deaths, of which over 10,000 are estimated to be nursing home patients, and a significant number of the others had dementia or significant underlying health issues. The remaining number is out of a population of 20 million. Are they being reckless to assume the risk? I don’t think so.
Post by: avromie7 on September 21, 2020, 09:43:48 AM
They are not Trumpers. They did a tremendous amount of research (they have the time to do it) and actually spoke to a couple of experts in the field. The came to the conclusion that there is hysteria and overreaction given the facts at hand. I’m sure there are others who have looked at the numbers and concluded that they want to take precautions, ranging from mild trade offs to full blown isolation. But I don’t think they are off base with their decision.It's more than 10k, halfway thru they stopped counting nursing home residents as nursing home deaths unless they died in the nursing home.
You do realize that even NY state which was hit hard had some 32,000 deaths, of which over 10,000 are estimated to be nursing home patients, and a significant number of the others had dementia or significant underlying health issues. The remaining number is out of a population of 20 million. Are they being reckless to assume the risk? I don’t think so.
Post by: aygart on September 21, 2020, 09:47:03 AM
They are not Trumpers. They did a tremendous amount of research (they have the time to do it) and actually spoke to a couple of experts in the field. The came to the conclusion that there is hysteria and overreaction given the facts at hand. I’m sure there are others who have looked at the numbers and concluded that they want to take precautions, ranging from mild trade offs to full blown isolation. But I don’t think they are off base with their decision.Saying that there is some hysteria out there is not the same as saying to throw all caution to the wind. I can tell you that last RH I was the only one saying kaddish in my shul and this year there were between 10 and 15 due to COVID. If they are in their &) then THEY ARE the at risk people that were being discussed. The most coherent argument for fewer precautions has always been that the older people should be more careful. If they are not then that goes out the window.
You do realize that even NY state which was hit hard had some 32,000 deaths, of which over 10,000 are estimated to be nursing home patients, and a significant number of the others had dementia or significant underlying health issues. The remaining number is out of a population of 20 million. Are they being reckless to assume the risk? I don’t think so.
Post by: cmey on September 21, 2020, 10:19:32 AM
It's more than 10k, halfway thru they stopped counting nursing home residents as nursing home deaths unless they died in the nursing home.That’s why the official number of 6500 nursing home deaths is assumed to be north of 10k.
Post by: SayWhat on September 21, 2020, 10:36:23 AM
That's one way to enforce mask wearing :o
Post by: neveryou on September 21, 2020, 06:02:43 PM
Post by: S209 on September 21, 2020, 06:07:04 PM
Some validation for those saying they feel like they can’t breathe
Post by: Euclid on September 21, 2020, 07:47:27 PM
Post by: ExGingi on September 21, 2020, 08:08:55 PM
Post by: Euclid on September 21, 2020, 08:11:22 PM
Something I've been curious about (I know it's been discussed upthread but didn't have a good conclusion). As per my friends and relatives in Israel, mask usage is extremely high and yet Covid is widespread. Does this "prove" that masks don't work?
One observation I had was that the masks must have been designed by some antisemite, as they were not designed to fit Jewish noses.Think I have my answer. Masks don't work for Jews. ;)
Post by: Lurker on September 21, 2020, 08:14:48 PM
Think I have my answer. Masks don't work for Jews. ;)
As long as air is free, we'll take the damaged stuff, too.
Post by: EliJelly on September 21, 2020, 10:48:32 PM
https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/why-it-feels-like-you-cant-breathe-inside-your-face-mask-and-what-to-doWow you really thought till now that people are faking for no good reason ::)
Some validation for those saying they feel like they can’t breathe
Post by: gozalim on September 21, 2020, 11:10:32 PM
Looking around 770 on RH I would guess that about 70%-80% were wearing some sort of mask (including chin masks). One observation I had was that the masks must have been designed by some antisemite, as they were not designed to fit Jewish noses.I've commented that that's the one good thing about the Chinese kn95 cones
Post by: S209 on September 21, 2020, 11:34:30 PM
Wow you really thought till now that people are faking for no good reason ::)As the article points out, it’s probably psychological. Which is valid.
I thought that people weren’t giving it a fair shot. I suspect it is a combination.
Post by: neveryou on September 21, 2020, 11:40:40 PM
https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/why-it-feels-like-you-cant-breathe-inside-your-face-mask-and-what-to-doBesides for that, I feel like I'm breathing stale air
Some validation for those saying they feel like they can’t breathe
Post by: ExGingi on September 21, 2020, 11:42:49 PM
I've commented that that's the one good thing about the Chinese kn95 cones
Those have other issues.
Post by: S209 on September 21, 2020, 11:52:01 PM
Besides for that, I feel like I'm breathing stale airWhy do you say besides for that? That is probably included
Post by: EliJelly on September 22, 2020, 12:46:17 AM
Why do you say besides for that? That is probably includedI always find myself lowering it below my face to grab a quick dose of fresh air before it suffocates me
Post by: S209 on September 22, 2020, 08:23:18 AM
I always find myself lowering it below my face to grab a quick dose of fresh air before it suffocates me
As the article points out, it’s probably psychological. Which is valid.
Post by: aygart on September 22, 2020, 08:24:50 AM
I thought that people weren’t giving it a fair shot. I suspect it is a combination.You need to get a bit out of your own 4 amos.
Post by: S209 on September 22, 2020, 08:52:19 AM
You need to get a bit out of your own 4 amos.Because people really are breathing their own carbon dioxide, and it’s not psychological? Got it
Post by: aygart on September 22, 2020, 09:18:47 AM
Because people really are breathing their own carbon dioxide, and it’s not psychological? Got it
Thank you for reaffirming
Post by: NTorch on September 22, 2020, 02:26:24 PM
Quote
According to modelling conducted by Fugaku, the world’s fastest supercomputer, the disposable medical masks now almost ubiquitous on streets in many countries across the world constitute a far more effective barrier to respiratory droplets than cotton varieties, The Telegraph reports.
Cotton masks blocked just 80% of spray emitted when a person inside coughed, and the figure dropped to around 60% when smaller drops were analyzed. In contrast, the disposable masks studied blocked nearly all droplets and around 90% of smaller droplets, most of which escaped through the gaps around the edge of the mask.
Fugaku can perform more than 415 quadrillion computations a second.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/516827
Post by: S209 on September 22, 2020, 04:13:08 PM
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/516827It does seem more and more that medical masks are nearly as effective as N95s in preventing transmission, while cotton masks are less effective
Post by: EliJelly on September 22, 2020, 04:22:30 PM
It does seem more and more that medical masks are nearly as effective as N95s in preventing transmission, while cotton masks are less effectiveThe cheap 3 ply 50 in a box is considered medical?
Post by: Yehuda57 on September 22, 2020, 04:44:46 PM
The cheap 3 ply 50 in a box is considered medical?
Depends on which ones you get. Many will say on them "for non-medical use" although they may be of the same quality. For regulation and cost purposes they are not certified as such. You can do little tests like try blow out a candle, see how much water it can hold, and other tests to see how good the mask is.
Post by: EliJelly on September 22, 2020, 04:51:12 PM
Depends on which ones you get. Many will say on them "for non-medical use" although they may be of the same quality. For regulation and cost purposes they are not certified as such. You can do little tests like try blow out a candle, see how much water it can hold, and other tests to see how good the mask is.The easier it is to blow a flame out, the less water it holds, the better :)
Post by: yuneeq on September 22, 2020, 05:06:21 PM
Depends on which ones you get. Many will say on them "for non-medical use" although they may be of the same quality. For regulation and cost purposes they are not certified as such. You can do little tests like try blow out a candle, see how much water it can hold, and other tests to see how good the mask is.
Many are pretty good for medical usage, in fact some of the masks I imported had better filtration than medical masks. But all the 3 ply masks aside for the big brands will say "not for medical use" due to Chinese export regulations.
Post by: Lurker on September 22, 2020, 05:13:06 PM
Post by: EliJelly on September 22, 2020, 05:19:36 PM
Does anyone have specific brands they recommend? Of the non-candle-extinguishing type ;)You're probably looking for the ones that people tend to wear on their chin :)
Post by: Lurker on September 22, 2020, 05:24:59 PM
You're probably looking for the ones that people tend to wear on their chin :)
The ones that make you high on your own carbon dioxide.
Post by: ExGingi on September 22, 2020, 05:30:09 PM
The ones that make you high on your own carbon dioxide.
Saran wrap
Post by: yuneeq on September 22, 2020, 05:34:15 PM
The ones that make you high on your own carbon dioxide.
https://tinyurl.com/y6aopl7b
Post by: NTorch on September 22, 2020, 05:45:04 PM
I always find myself lowering it below my face to grab a quick dose of fresh air before it suffocates me
Does anyone have specific brands they recommend? Of the non-candle-extinguishing type ;)
So I have done a little experimenting with this because I give a daf shiur and lain during the week and on Shabbos and YT, so for what its worth here is what I found:
Surgical masks are the lightest but they dont stay on for an hour long shiur or for seven aliyos on Shabbos.
Cotton masks can be a bit stifling, but allow me to project better than KN95's
KN95's dont allow me to that loud, but give the most room to breathe and keep me cool because of the duck bill shape.
So I lained both days RH and what I did was I wore the KN95, then the cotton mask for laining and then immediately switched back to a KN95 after I finished laining. The cotton mask allowed me to amplify and I had the immediate cooling when done.
I do wear the KN95 when giving daf, but it seems to be less of an issue for people to hear me since unlike when I am laining, I face the tzibur when giving shiur.
Finally - my AC is a teacher in Beis Yaakov and she uses a mask guard under a cloth mask which keeps the mask from stifling her, but also does not ruin the seal.
Post by: Yehuda57 on September 22, 2020, 07:14:04 PM
Does anyone have specific brands they recommend? Of the non-candle-extinguishing type ;)
https://www.amazon.com/wecare/?tag=cl03f-20&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER
Full disclosure, I work for the company that sells these, but I wore these the entire Rosh Hashana davenning comfortably. The tests described above have been performed by unsolicited reviewers. Plus they are individually wrapped which keeps them sanitary to throw in your kid's backpack, your pocket, your wife's purse, etc. And they come in kids and adult sizes.
Post by: S209 on September 22, 2020, 08:21:37 PM
https://www.amazon.com/wecare/?tag=cl03f-20&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DERLike this if you only clicked to see where @Yehuda57 works ;)
Full disclosure, I work for the company that sells these, but I wore these the entire Rosh Hashana davenning comfortably. The tests described above have been performed by unsolicited reviewers. Plus they are individually wrapped which keeps them sanitary to throw in your kid's backpack, your pocket, your wife's purse, etc. And they come in kids and adult sizes.
Post by: Lurker on September 22, 2020, 08:24:09 PM
Like this if you only clicked to see where @Yehuda57 works ;)
That's just his Clark Kent job.
Post by: EliJelly on September 22, 2020, 08:25:52 PM
Like this if you only clicked to see where @Yehuda57 works ;)And like this if you also wondered how a gifted writer deploy his skills at such a company :)
Post by: Yehuda57 on September 22, 2020, 09:59:45 PM
And like this if you also wondered how a gifted writer deploy his skills at such a company :)
And you discovered that SEO doesn't usually lend itself to snarky one liners?
Post by: neveryou on September 22, 2020, 11:18:42 PM
Post by: Lurker on September 22, 2020, 11:25:15 PM
5G, man. Gotta control the sheep. If they muzzle the people, man, and then don't let them go anywhere to talk about it, then they win.
- the Tommy Chong voice in my head
Post by: EliJelly on September 22, 2020, 11:28:43 PM
And you discovered that SEO doesn't usually lend itself to snarky one liners?Ah got it, It's SEO, indeed not ideal for one liners but being snarky does not disqualify, neither does being complimenting qualify.
Post by: S209 on September 23, 2020, 12:14:02 AM
Another example of the stellar logic that permeates DDF
Post by: Yard sale on September 24, 2020, 12:50:57 AM
https://vosizneias.com/2020/09/24/ner-yisroel-baltimore-campus-on-lockdown-after-covid-positive-cases/
Post by: NTorch on September 24, 2020, 10:18:11 AM
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpPkbYs8/Whats-App-Image-2020-09-23-at-6-11-12-PM.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Post by: Yo ssi on September 24, 2020, 10:29:54 AM
Picture (https://postimages.org/)Repost (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=114650.msg2326636#msg2326636)
And there's even a modified version ;)
Post by: NTorch on September 24, 2020, 10:40:26 AM
Repost (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=114650.msg2326636#msg2326636)
And there's even a modified version ;)
Did not see it. Sorry.
Post by: Dawie on September 24, 2020, 11:35:52 AM
Ohio is staring to look similar to Melbourne.
— Mythinformed MKE (@MythinformedMKE) September 24, 2020
Officer uses taser on girl outdoors at a football scrimmage ... her crime? — Not wearing a mask. pic.twitter.com/z93dZplGYQ
Post by: S209 on September 24, 2020, 11:47:44 AM
That’s pretty freaky. Then again, she was resisting arrest.Ohio is staring to look similar to Melbourne.
— Mythinformed MKE (@MythinformedMKE) September 24, 2020
Officer uses taser on girl outdoors at a football scrimmage ... her crime? — Not wearing a mask. pic.twitter.com/z93dZplGYQ
Post by: avromie7 on September 24, 2020, 11:51:12 AM
That’s pretty freaky. Then again, she was resisting arrest.
It should never have gotten to that point.
Post by: S209 on September 24, 2020, 11:52:32 AM
Said Rishard Brooks, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Eric Garner etc.. as we have been told repeatedly, there is never an excuse for resisting arrest, and if you resist arrest, bad things will happen to you.
It should never have gotten to that point.
Post by: aygart on September 24, 2020, 11:59:18 AM
Said Rishard Brooks, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Eric Garner etc.. as we have been told repeatedly, there is never an excuse for resisting arrest, and if you resist arrest, bad things will happen to you.Okay so the issue here is only that she was getting arrested? The rest can go in the police violence thread.
Post by: S209 on September 24, 2020, 12:05:18 PM
Okay so the issue here is only that she was getting arrested? The rest can go in the police violence thread.But it looks like she was being arrested for refusing to comply with a lawful order. Which would mean that the only issue is that there’s a mask rule.
Everything else is a police violence issue.
Post by: Dawie on September 24, 2020, 12:16:56 PM
Post by: S209 on September 24, 2020, 12:24:27 PM
mall copsLike these?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/us/alabama-mall-shooting-death.html
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/crime/os-ne-salaythis-melvin-shooting-body-camera-video-20200813-dyxv6lf4vrbcjhufsuz2q2rkam-story.html
Post by: Yo ssi on September 24, 2020, 12:49:40 PM
Said Rishard Brooks, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Eric Garner etc.. as we have been told repeatedly, there is never an excuse for resisting arrest, and if you resist arrest, bad things will happen to you.Agreed to an extent. From what it seems, there was no real danger / threat to the officer, and there was another one standing idly on the side. When there's 2 against one and no danger, I don't think tasing was necessary.
Then again I wouldn't make any judgement solely from a certain video, כיודע theirs always 2 sides to a story, and I strongly disbelieve it should be used as a sole source for firing people.
Post by: S209 on September 24, 2020, 01:01:19 PM
Agreed to an extent. From what it seems, there was no real danger / threat to the officer, and there was another one standing idly on the side. When there's 2 against one and no danger, I don't think tasing was necessary.All true but don’t forget in many of the stories the officers were not in danger as well
Then again I wouldn't make any judgement solely from a certain video, כיודע theirs always 2 sides to a story, and I strongly disbelieve it should be used as a sole source for firing people.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 26, 2020, 08:58:57 PM
Repost (https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=114650.msg2326636#msg2326636)
And there's even a modified version ;)
Post by: Euclid on September 26, 2020, 09:06:16 PM
Moldex and 3M (with a vent) are too small.
Post by: Lurker on September 26, 2020, 09:08:19 PM
Are there any N95s that can fit a Jewish sized nose?
Moldex and 3M (with a vent) are too small.
So the avatar isn't altogether inaccurate...
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 26, 2020, 09:11:19 PM
Said Rishard Brooks, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Eric Garner etc.. as we have been told repeatedly, there is never an excuse for resisting arrest, and if you resist arrest, bad things will happen to you.The question is if the "officer" had a right to arrest her for not wearing a mask.
Rest assured, if the color of the skins were reversed, we would know her name, and that city would be in flames.
Post by: drosenberg88429 on September 26, 2020, 10:31:15 PM
Are there any N95s that can fit a Jewish sized nose?
Moldex and 3M (with a vent) are too small.
Am I allowed to comment on mask with vent?
Post by: S209 on September 26, 2020, 11:14:50 PM
The question is if the "officer" had a right to arrest her for not wearing a mask.No problem, but the quote mentioned a taser, nothing about the arrest. The taser was seemingly justified (apparently), only the arrest was suspect.
Rest assured, if the color of the skins were reversed, we would know her name, and that city would be in flames.
Post by: Euclid on September 26, 2020, 11:42:44 PM
Am I allowed to comment on mask with vent?I know, I know. Was just trying it on for size - I had that mask anyways, not going to buy it now.
Post by: ExGingi on September 27, 2020, 12:09:38 AM
Post by: neveryou on September 29, 2020, 12:12:33 PM
Another hypocrite demokkkrat
Rules for thee but not for me
"Some animals are more equal than others"
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 29, 2020, 12:14:49 PM
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dianne-feinstein-no-mask-tucker-carlson
Another hypocrite demokkkrat
Rules for thee but not for me
"Some animals are more equal than others"
The same reason she was allowed to go to the barber to take a haircut, while the commoners had to stay locked down.
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 29, 2020, 12:22:47 PM
Officials will first offer free masks to those caught not wearing one. If the person refuses, they will face an unspecified fine, de Blasio told reporters.
Post by: Hjay on September 29, 2020, 07:22:37 PM
New York City will impose fines on people who refuse to wear a face covering as the rate of positive tests for the novel coronavirus climbed above 3% for the first time in months, Mayor Bill de Blasio said on Tuesday.
Officials will first offer free masks to those caught not wearing one. If the person refuses, they will face an unspecified fine, de Blasio told reporters.
Refuse to wear masks where? I keep seeing that quote
Post by: ExGingi on September 29, 2020, 09:39:56 PM
Refuse to wear masks where? I keep seeing that quote
(https://gyazo.com/dc7700e35326c79e85bc3025d99e1077.jpg)
This is going around along with the following:
Quote
Tickets being issued to customers as well as workers
Anyone in a closed place not wearing a mask will be fined if caught
Post by: Yehuda57 on September 29, 2020, 09:56:14 PM
This is going around along with the following:
This reeks of a WhatsApp bobbe maaseh
Post by: Lurker on September 29, 2020, 09:58:26 PM
This is going around along with the following:
Thought this:
This reeks of a WhatsApp bobbe maaseh
Anyone able to verify? Those don't look like the meter maids they sent out in Round 1.
Post by: ExGingi on September 29, 2020, 10:15:53 PM
This reeks of a WhatsApp bobbe maaseh
That was my response to DW who sent it to me, she sent a follow-up message that the location is confirmed.
Post by: Lurker on September 29, 2020, 10:17:26 PM
That was my response to DW who sent it to me, she sent a follow-up message that the location is confirmed.
I don't think the location was in question... did anyone verify what those cops were doing there?
Post by: Yehuda57 on September 29, 2020, 10:19:15 PM
That was my response to DW who sent it to me, she sent a follow-up message that the location is confirmed.
What does that mean, that it is the Market Place in the picture? I can see that.
Post by: Yehuda57 on September 29, 2020, 11:05:00 PM
Post by: yuneeq on September 29, 2020, 11:06:45 PM
There are pics of cops handing out masks in front of 770, as de Blasio said they would. (if you refuse a free mask, THEN you get a ticket). They are NYC cops, not state.
Basically no one will get a ticket unless they really, really want one.
Post by: Euclid on September 29, 2020, 11:11:32 PM
Basically no one will get a ticket unless they really, really want one.Heshy Tishler is on his way.
Post by: yitzgar on September 29, 2020, 11:14:06 PM
Heshy Tishler is on his way.
Post by: ExGingi on September 29, 2020, 11:16:11 PM
Post by: hllulbh1 on September 29, 2020, 11:19:37 PM
Post by: Yo ssi on September 29, 2020, 11:20:27 PM
Are those masks at all effective on top of a full length beard?It's as affective as handing them out ;D
Post by: Lurker on September 29, 2020, 11:27:40 PM
https://anash.org/police-giving-tickets-for-no-mask-on-kingston-ave/
Notice the difference between the cops on the street and the ones in the store. I don't think any of the ones by 770 were even armed.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on September 29, 2020, 11:29:05 PM
Notice the difference between the cops on the street and the ones in the store. I don't think any of the ones by 770 were even armed.They probably went in to buy some coffee and danishes.
Post by: S209 on September 29, 2020, 11:32:15 PM
Are those masks at all effective on top of a full length beard?Yes, of course. Why wouldn’t they be?
https://anash.org/police-giving-tickets-for-no-mask-on-kingston-ave/The cops have it below their nose
Post by: avromie7 on September 29, 2020, 11:33:03 PM
Post by: S209 on September 29, 2020, 11:44:40 PM
A) It isn’t clear what role aerosols play in transmission, but it’s certainly not the only way the virus is transmitted. Large respiratory droplets play at least a large role, if not the clear primary role (the current assumption). Distancing helps, but of course masks help as well.
B) Just because some of the aerosolized vapors came through doesn’t mean some weren’t filtered. Even in the video, you can clearly see the difference between the medical/surgical masks and the cloth ones. The less virus that comes out, the less the ability to infect. Even if the masks just lower the momentum of the particles escaping (causing the droplets to fall to the floor or dissipate sooner, which is one of the reasons masks are recommended) but don’t actually prevent them from getting out, the potential to infect others is dramatically reduced.
C) Not all aerosols are created equal.
Masks and distancing *reduce* but do not *eliminate* transmission. That’s why people should wear masks, but not rely on them completely.
Post by: neveryou on September 30, 2020, 08:55:43 AM
**Hot Mic** PA Gov @TomWolfPA & PA State Representative @RepUllman caught calling facemasks “political theater” pic.twitter.com/N4F2ncDHIx
— Young Republican National Federation (@yrnf) September 29, 2020
Post by: S209 on September 30, 2020, 09:45:52 AM
Post by: avromie7 on September 30, 2020, 09:46:53 AM
Fact Check: The video is hilarious. But the headline is misleading.What's misleading?
Post by: S209 on September 30, 2020, 09:53:41 AM
What's misleading?Come now. She doesn’t say face masks are political theater. She says she wants to perform political theater by removing it on camera.
Post by: avromie7 on September 30, 2020, 09:56:38 AM
Come now. She doesn’t say face masks are political theater. She says she wants to perform political theater by removing it on camera.Which part do you think is the political theater? Wearing the mask before speaking or not wearing the mask while speaking?
Post by: yuneeq on September 30, 2020, 10:25:40 AM
This video is relevant for people exhaling smoke from their mouths, otherwise it’s completely useless for demonstrating the usefulness of masks. Plenty of accurate videos have been created by researchers of real life situations, talking, yelling, coughing, and they show far different results.
Post by: S209 on September 30, 2020, 10:37:23 AM
Which part do you think is the political theater? Wearing the mask before speaking or not wearing the mask while speaking?The ceremonious removal of the mask.
Post by: avromie7 on September 30, 2020, 10:47:19 AM
This video is relevant for people exhaling smoke from their mouths, otherwise it’s completely useless for demonstrating the usefulness of masks. Plenty of accurate videos have been created by researchers of real life situations, talking, yelling, coughing, and they show far different results.Please explain, why exhaling smoke is different than exhaling air?
Post by: avromie7 on September 30, 2020, 10:48:52 AM
The ceremonious removal of the mask.Correct me if you disagree, the removal of the mask on camera gives the impression of "I wear a mask whenever I'm not speaking".
Post by: S209 on September 30, 2020, 11:01:18 AM
Correct me if you disagree, the removal of the mask on camera gives the impression of "I wear a mask whenever I'm not speaking".True. The headline wasn’t false. But it was a drop misleading (like many/most headlines are).
If she would have said “Wearing face masks is political theater”, the headline would have summed it up accurately. But what she said (and what her intentions were) was that this specific instance of removing (and by implication, wearing) a face mask is for political theater (as which moment she removed her mask didn’t have a genuine health consideration).
In summation: The headline suggests she calls face masks political theater (suggesting that is their purpose, not public health). In truth, while she said those words in that instance, it’s not what she meant.
(CV is conspicuously missing from this conversation.)
Post by: Hjay on September 30, 2020, 11:12:22 AM
1. In brief, how great is the benefit of masks - meaning what percentage of spread does it stop, how does wearing them properly or not (not fully on, facial hair, constant adjusting) affect those numbers & which masks work better or worse?
If you can please link 2 or 3 real articles (not political) with studies.
2. Before the CDC reversed their guidance, & recommended masks, was the general consensus among the medical community that the CDC was wrong? Or they were all following the CDC? (I do remember there being a lot of talk here about the CDC being wrong but I’m wondering if doctors were all going against the CDC as well)
Post by: S209 on September 30, 2020, 11:35:56 AM
2 questions -
1. In brief, how great is the benefit of masks - meaning what percentage of spread does it stop, how does wearing them properly or not (not fully on, facial hair, constant adjusting) affect those numbers & which masks work better or worse?
If you can please link 2 or 3 real articles (not political) with studies.
Here are some
List of studies. Knock yourself out
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4pt4oFDBhsC_jpblXpNtQ/preview#
2. Before the CDC reversed their guidance, & recommended masks, was the general consensus among the medical community that the CDC was wrong? Or they were all following the CDC? (I do remember there being a lot of talk here about the CDC being wrong but I’m wondering if doctors were all going against the CDC as well)
To answer your question: The medical establishment/doctors take guidance from the CDC, so they did not advise communal mask wearing. However, any individual doctor would have told you to wear a mask if you needed extra protection, and would have required a COVID+ person to wear a mask if they left the house.
The question wasn’t whether masks are beneficial in slowing person-to person transmission of COVID. It was whether the benefits of communal mask wearing would outweigh the costs at the time.
There also was the concern of fomites, which has since been shown not to be the main source of spread. Because person-to-person transmission now known to be the main source of spread, the benefits of mask wearing (which reduce person-to-person spread) outweigh the potential hazards (which raise the potential for fomite spread).
NOTES:
1) A large part of the CDC guidance was predicated on the assumption that COVID-19 wasn’t widely seeded, so communal wearing of face masks was unwarranted and didn’t offer as great a benefit. Contact tracing was considered much more important.
2) They claimed that asymptomatic/pre-symptomatic spread wasn’t proven, which would effectively negate the largest benefit of masks, although it was well known at that point as @yuneeq often reminded us.
3) The crux of the guidance was that masks were being diverted from medical personnel, as there was a severe shortage of PPE, for use in community settings where the potential benefit was unknown. This could have had terrible overall implications for medicine. Later, they encouraged homemade masks, circumventing this issue to an extent while allowing for mask usage.
4) It is universally acknowledged that it was a mistake. They were criticized at the time as well. Note that the quote from @aygart is from March, before the CDC reversed guidance.
5) In the earliest days it wasn’t clear what played a greater role in transmission, fomites or respiratory droplets/aerosols. That debate was settled in April with more information, showing that fomite transmission was relatively rare.
Post by: yuneeq on September 30, 2020, 11:50:21 AM
Please explain, why exhaling smoke is different than exhaling air?
Irrelevant question. It was never a question if masks completely blocked air, obviously they don't block air going in/out or else we wouldn't be able to breathe at all.
The question is if masks block the droplets that naturally disperse when speaking, yelling, coughing, or just breathing. And the answer is a resounding yes.
Post by: 4yourinfo on October 01, 2020, 09:04:41 AM
Irrelevant question. It was never a question if masks completely blocked air, obviously they don't block air going in/out or else we wouldn't be able to breathe at all.Like I wrote elsewhere - maybe it's time to just ask people to wear a mask just over the mouth? Everyone clearly agrees that's where it matters most. It's a huge comfort difference and you might just get alot more compliance..
The question is if masks block the droplets that naturally disperse when speaking, yelling, coughing, or just breathing. And the answer is a resounding yes.
Post by: Lurker on October 01, 2020, 09:11:52 AM
Like I wrote elsewhere - maybe it's time to just ask people to wear a mask just over the mouth? Everyone clearly agrees that's where it matters most. It's a huge comfort difference and you might just get alot more compliance..
False.
Post by: aygart on October 01, 2020, 09:38:09 AM
False.Who disagrees?
Post by: Lurker on October 01, 2020, 09:49:35 AM
Who disagrees?
Who agrees? Where does this premise come from? Virtually every doctor has been warning that masks are ineffective if not worn properly.
Post by: aygart on October 01, 2020, 09:51:13 AM
Who agrees? Where does this premise come from? Virtually every doctor has been warning that masks are ineffective if not worn properly.
Ineffective or less effective?
If much of the transmission is from singing, talking, and coughing then covering the mouth will protect from those.
Post by: Lurker on October 01, 2020, 09:55:32 AM
Ineffective or less effective?
If much of the transmission is from singing, talking, and coughing then covering the mouth will protect from those.
The reports I've seen all say ineffective. And while your theory may make some sense, this statement
Everyone clearly agrees that's where it matters most.
is false.
Post by: ExGingi on October 01, 2020, 09:55:39 AM
Ineffective or less effective?
If much of the transmission is from singing, talking, and coughing then covering the mouth will protect from those.
In addition to the simple anatomical fact that most nostrils point downward vs mouths which project exhalation forward.
Post by: aygart on October 01, 2020, 10:12:49 AM
The reports I've seen all say ineffective. And while your theory may make some sense, this statement
is false.
THat can't possibly be the case. You are paying the same all or nothing game. If you can get 20% more people to wear masks without covering the nose how can that just be brushed off?
Post by: Lurker on October 01, 2020, 10:19:19 AM
THat can't possibly be the case. You are paying the same all or nothing game. If you can get 20% more people to wear masks without covering the nose how can that just be brushed off?
Again, the theory has some merit, in my unprofessional opinion. However, I have yet to see a study that suggests that it makes medical sense, let alone anything to lend credence to the statement that everyone agrees that wearing a mask over the mouth is where it matters most.
If it can't possibly be the case, show studies that back it up.
Post by: Euclid on October 01, 2020, 10:23:16 AM
*this is complete satire
Post by: Yehuda57 on October 01, 2020, 10:50:45 AM
I actually heard* that only covering the mouth is even worse because the external viral particles get stuck on the mask and then sucked up into the nose, causing a higher viral load. Better to not wear a mask at all.
*this is complete satire
Well, that was a fun ride
Post by: aygart on October 01, 2020, 11:02:01 AM
Again, the theory has some merit, in my unprofessional opinion. However, I have yet to see a study that suggests that it makes medical sense, let alone anything to lend credence to the statement that everyone agrees that wearing a mask over the mouth is where it matters most.Some is always better than none
If it can't possibly be the case, show studies that back it up.
Post by: NTorch on October 01, 2020, 12:07:44 PM
Quote
Ahead of the Sukkot holiday, leading rabbis Rabbi Haim Kanievsky and Rabbi Gershon Edelstein released a letter giving instructions on communal prayers and conduct during the holiday in light of coronavirus.
"The warden of the synagogue will see to it these days, to ensure the possibilities of prayers as much as possible in the open space of the synagogue courtyards, etc., and the reward for all those who can help with this in other places is great.
"During the entire holiday, one must not be a guest for meals etc., and those at high risk, including the elderly, should be very careful, " the rabbis noted.
"One of the things that is very protective against infection when among people is wearing masks, and their benefit is very great and should not be taken lightly."
"One of the mitzvot of Sukkot is joy and everyone should be very joyful on the holiday, and actions should be taken to make one's family and children happy and to create a pleasant atmosphere at home."
The rabbis noted that after one puts in the necessary effort, the obligation remains to "believe and trust in Hashem, Blessed be He, who is the leader and overseer, and the virus will harm nobody if it is not decreed from above, and we should take advantage of the upcoming holiday to strengthen belief."
"The fundamental principle: the Torah protects and saves, and we must grow stronger in studying Torah, and through the strength of the Torah we will be saved from any sickness."
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/288194
Post by: aygart on October 01, 2020, 12:09:38 PM
I have not seen the R' Chaim Kanievsky letter, but Arutz Sheva had a summary which included this sentence on masks which I bolded:
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/288194 (https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/288194)
I’m lazy too (:
(https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=117153.0;attach=37368;image)
Post by: NTorch on October 01, 2020, 12:21:15 PM
Thanks - I had not been on the Covid-Israel board recently. The summary in Arutz Sheva is an accurate translation and should seemingly put to bed the question of whether the Gedolim want us to wear masks.
Post by: Hjay on October 02, 2020, 12:52:02 AM
Seeing so many people wearing masks at times that there should be no reason to such as jogging, riding bikes, driving cars & doing other things with zero interaction with others, it just doesn’t make sense.
Post by: Euclid on October 02, 2020, 12:55:03 AM
Post by: NTorch on October 02, 2020, 01:22:54 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/NfkqqsH7/Whats-App-Image-2020-10-02-at-1-21-36-PM.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/bsrF1jLs)
Post by: Kobe Bryant on October 02, 2020, 03:16:46 PM
A DP for the "LOL look at that dummy driving with a mask" crowd, my child has covid and as per doctor we (rest of family) are wearing masks when together. So if you see a moron wearing a mask in a seemingly empty mini van...give me a wave ;)Presumably it wouldn't be empty.
Post by: Yehudaa on October 02, 2020, 05:07:15 PM
Presumably it wouldn't be empty.
A DP for the "LOL look at that dummy driving with a mask" crowd, my child has covid and as per doctor we (rest of family) are wearing masks when together. So if you see a moron wearing a mask in a seemingly empty mini van...give me a wave ;)
Post by: Kobe Bryant on October 02, 2020, 06:12:32 PM
I will always be entertained, by those driving alone and wearing a mask.
Post by: Euclid on October 04, 2020, 09:38:38 PM
Post by: aygart on October 04, 2020, 09:51:11 PM
https://mycovidjourney.com/2020/09/30/do-masks-work-or-not/
From a quick glance, it seems that the whole article is pointing out the simple contradiction between the first half and second half of this quote without ever actually pointing it out.
“My friend told me that masks only work half the time and that there’s no difference between wearing them and not wearing them.”
Post by: MoMo22 on October 04, 2020, 10:51:22 PM
https://www.ebay.com/itm/143645635148
Post by: S209 on October 04, 2020, 10:59:15 PM
$2.96 or cheaper for 50 PCS -Disposable Face Mask- Non Medical Surgical Mouth Nose Earloop CoveringsThanks, ordered a few.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/143645635148
Post by: Euclid on October 04, 2020, 11:20:51 PM
Post by: neveryou on October 06, 2020, 11:52:36 PM
Post by: S209 on October 07, 2020, 12:00:10 AM
https://youtu.be/h0LioZvXH78She’s an anti-vaxxer. (https://jpands.org/vol25no3/merritt.pdf)
You decide if that’s relevant.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on October 07, 2020, 12:15:28 AM
https://nypost.com/2020/10/06/fight-on-flight-after-man-with-face-shield-refuses-to-wear-mask/amp/
Post by: NTorch on October 07, 2020, 10:22:52 AM
Quote
The head of the Merkaz Harav yeshiva in Jerusalem, Rabbi Yaakov Shapira, calls on the citizens of Israel, including members of the religious Zionist community, to obey the guidelines of the Health Ministry, wear masks, maintain social distancing and avoid gatherings.https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/288599
"We are approaching Simchat Torah which is the culmination of all the festivals," he said. "The purpose of Simchat Torah is to say the verse 'You are instructed to know that the Lord is G-d and there is no other besides Him.'"
"Everything that the world is currently undergoing renovations, all because G-d is alone, he knows when there will be a cure for this plague," he added. "But the Torah requires of you to protect your lives very carefully."
"To celebrate Simchat Torah in the present circumstances, even though it is not easy, we should look at the yeshiva as an example. There are no students now, and this does not bring us any joy, all the moreso during Simchat Torah. But the Torah tells us to be joyful during the holidays. We should rejoice with the Torah, and the Torah should rejoice with us; The Torah will rejoice with us if we keep to the guidelines. And you will guard your lives very carefully.
"Do not get too close to each other, put on the masks," said Rabbi Shapira. "I am not a doctor, but we are commanded in the words of the Torah to do everything so that no one will get sick, and so that whoever does get sick should return to us quickly. So that the people of Israel themselves will return to us soon."
Post by: PlatinumGuy on October 08, 2020, 02:21:32 PM
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 02:22:20 PM
It appears Mizrachi areas have less Covid than the rest of Israel. Kol Hakavodcorrelation =/= causation
Post by: Lurker on October 08, 2020, 02:33:40 PM
correlation =/= causation
Keep pounding that drum. Here's the thing about proving precautions work: you can't do it. You can't prove something that didn't happen. Correlation is about as good as you're going to get here.
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 03:04:36 PM
Keep pounding that drum. Here's the thing about proving precautions work: you can't do it. You can't prove something that didn't happen. Correlation is about as good as you're going to get here."Because there is no proof, let's use the lack of proof as proof."
Post by: Lurker on October 08, 2020, 03:08:30 PM
"Because there is no proof, let's use the lack of proof as proof."
Not proof. But don't dismiss the results out of hand.
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 03:15:49 PM
Not proof. But don't dismiss the results out of hand.Quite a few posters have used this type of correlation as evidence of causation. I'm glad to see you don't take it at face value. I think there are other things that are more likely to be the cause, COVID+ people walking around like nothing happened is much more likely at fault. To assume lack of masks is always the culprit is very shallow.
Post by: Lurker on October 08, 2020, 03:17:52 PM
Quite a few posters have used this type of correlation as evidence of causation. I'm glad to see you don't take it at face value. I think there are other things that are more likely to be the cause, COVID+ people walking around like nothing happened is much more likely at fault. To assume lack of masks is always the culprit is very shallow.
It's not THE cause, but you can't argue that it's not a factor. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find someone with Covid walking around mask-less in a society where masks are the norm. Which is another huge benefit to masks.
Post by: Ergel on October 08, 2020, 03:18:28 PM
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 03:19:07 PM
It's not THE cause, but you can't argue that it's not a possible factor. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find someone with Covid walking around mask-less in a society where masks are the norm. Which is another huge benefit to masks.FTFY
Post by: Lurker on October 08, 2020, 03:20:46 PM
FTFY
No, it's a factor, in one way or another, even if it's just as a visual reminder to take precautions. How much of a factor.. That you can debate.
Post by: aygart on October 08, 2020, 03:26:04 PM
"Because there is no proof, let's use the lack of proof as proof."Correlation does not prove causation, but it does show that there is a good chance they are connected. Saying that they are not equal does not show the lack of causation. Enough the higher and more frequent the correlation the more likely they are to be connected.
Post by: AsherO on October 08, 2020, 04:09:05 PM
In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find someone with Covid walking around mask-less in a society where masks are the norm. Which is another huge benefit to masks.
Masks are effective as a mitigating factor in the general population where COVID isn’t confirmed/below a certain prevalence. Someone positive should be isolated, mask or not.
Post by: Lurker on October 08, 2020, 05:37:55 PM
Masks are effective as a mitigating factor in the general population where COVID isn’t confirmed/below a certain prevalence. Someone positive should be isolated, mask or not.
You won't get an argument from me on that. @avromie7's theory is that the reason for most of the spread is COVIDiots walking around without a mask while infected. We're obviously talking about people and places where isolation isn't happening. My point is that if the general population was all wearing masks, those COVIDiots would be, too, cutting down on the spread tremendously. Just another reason for mask mandates.
Post by: AsherO on October 08, 2020, 07:16:08 PM
You won't get an argument from me on that. @avromie7's theory is that the reason for most of the spread is COVIDiots walking around without a mask while infected. We're obviously talking about people and places where isolation isn't happening. My point is that if the general population was all wearing masks, those COVIDiots would be, too, cutting down on the spread tremendously. Just another reason for mask mandates.
@avromie7’s goalpost-moving agenda has always been for his and everyone else’s life to go on as usual. Blaming it on COVID+ people not isolating is convenient because then it makes him seem like he’s on our side because we all agree that’s wrong. What he’s missing is that masks and SD are the guidelines for everyone, himself included. For anyone COVID+ they need strict isolation, at that point masks and SD are NOT sufficient anymore.
Post by: S209 on October 08, 2020, 08:03:20 PM
"Because there is no proof, let's use the lack of proof as proof."Statistically significant correlation is actually considered valid supporting evidence, although not final proof. It helps shift the burden of finding a valid third variable to the party denying the causation. Of course, finding statistically significant results to support a hypothesized finding is very different from picking one significant correlation out of a data table.
With enough instances of a correlation, it’s likely that many would consider it proof pending a clear and obvious reason for dismissal.
What is a demonstrable third variable that applies to all locations that adhere to to masks/SD vs. similar and close locations that don’t behave this way that would explain the discrepancy in case load, and what makes you believe that variable is as or more likely than masks/SD?
You can find some interesting points about this here (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3932066/)
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 08:28:40 PM
@avromie7’s goalpost-moving agenda has always been for his and everyone else’s life to go on as usual. Blaming it on COVID+ people not isolating is convenient because then it makes him seem like he’s on our side because we all agree that’s wrong. What he’s missing is that masks and SD are the guidelines for everyone, himself included. For anyone COVID+ they need strict isolation, at that point masks and SD are NOT sufficient anymore.Goalpost moving? What was the goalpost that moved?
The reason people not isolating wasn't discussed is because I was never aware of it happening.
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 08:31:32 PM
Statistically significant correlation is actually considered valid supporting evidence, although not final proof. It helps shift the burden of finding a valid third variable to the party denying the causation. Of course, finding statistically significant results to support a hypothesized finding is very different from picking one significant correlation out of a data table.COVID+ people not isolating.
With enough instances of a correlation, it’s likely that many would consider it proof pending a clear and obvious reason for dismissal.
What is a demonstrable third variable that applies to all locations that adhere to to masks/SD vs. similar and close locations that don’t behave this way that would explain the discrepancy in case load, and what makes you believe that variable is as or more likely than masks/SD?
You can find some interesting points about this here (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3932066/)
Post by: S209 on October 08, 2020, 08:34:42 PM
COVID+ people not isolating.Is that more true in communities that don’t adhere to mask wearing? Is it universally true in all areas that don’t/didn’t require masks (such as Florida before they started)?
I agree with you that it is a potential third variable that could explain the discrepancy.
Post by: S209 on October 08, 2020, 08:38:15 PM
Somone posted a list of studies about the efficacy of masks. Can someone please link?
It was @yuneeq in the “How to spot a Trump supporter thread” in JS. Not searching for the original post now but here (https://threader.app/thread/1279144399897866248) is the link. There is already a lot more data at this point than there was even then.
Post by: AsherO on October 08, 2020, 08:40:11 PM
Goalpost moving? What was the goalpost that moved?
The reason people not isolating wasn't discussed is because I was never aware of it happening.
You were called out for goalpost moving in another thread. You’re welcome to address the rest of my post. Of course as soon as you become aware of a datapoint/angle you try to shoehorn it into your preconceived agenda which has been prevalent in this forum.
Post by: aygart on October 08, 2020, 08:42:48 PM
Is that more true in communities that don’t adhere to mask wearing? Is it universally true in all areas that don’t/didn’t require masks (such as Florida before they started)?
I agree with you that it is a potential third variable that could explain the discrepancy.
I don't have data, but it would make sense that communities not taking it seriously in one way are also not taking it seriously in others ways. That would be another correlation between non mask wearing communities and COVIDiots. Very likely causation there too.
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 08:43:30 PM
Is that more true in communities that don’t adhere to mask wearing? Is it universally true in all areas that don’t/didn’t require masks (such as Florida before they started)?I don't have hard data, and it would be difficult to come by. I think it's safe to say, people who wear masks are definitely isolating when COVID+ and people who won't isolate are definitely not wearing masks. (Most of the people I know are in the middle, not wearing masks but isolating if COVID+)
I agree with you that it is a potential third variable that could explain the discrepancy.
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 08:45:01 PM
You were called out for goalpost moving in another thread. You’re welcome to address the rest of my post. Of course as soon as you become aware of a datapoint/angle you try to shoehorn it into your preconceived agenda which has been prevalent in this forum.Link? We would all benefit from an honest discussion instead of character assasination.
Post by: AsherO on October 08, 2020, 08:57:28 PM
Link? We would all benefit from an honest discussion instead of character assasination.
So just to be sure, are we moving the goalposts?
We both agree an honest discussion will be beneficial, but we apparently have different standards for honesty.
Post by: avromie7 on October 08, 2020, 09:00:09 PM
We both agree an honest discussion will be beneficial, but we apparently have different standards for honesty.You clearly haven't been following, I answered that post weeks ago. I don't see any honest discussion in your part.
Post by: biobook on October 08, 2020, 09:20:11 PM
Somone posted a list of studies about the efficacy of masks. Can someone please link?@Ergel I don't know if this is the list you wanted, but you might find something here.
https://www.masktoprotect.org/science
Post by: biobook on October 08, 2020, 10:36:19 PM
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
06 October 2020 Face masks: what the data say
Post by: neveryou on October 09, 2020, 12:45:18 PM
Post by: aygart on October 09, 2020, 03:21:41 PM
Repost and ere is a response
A) It isn’t clear what role aerosols play in transmission, but it’s certainly not the only way the virus is transmitted. Large respiratory droplets play at least a large role, if not the clear primary role (the current assumption). Distancing helps, but of course masks help as well.
B) Just because some of the aerosolized vapors came through doesn’t mean some weren’t filtered. Even in the video, you can clearly see the difference between the medical/surgical masks and the cloth ones. The less virus that comes out, the less the ability to infect. Even if the masks just lower the momentum of the particles escaping (causing the droplets to fall to the floor or dissipate sooner, which is one of the reasons masks are recommended) but don’t actually prevent them from getting out, the potential to infect others is dramatically reduced.
C) Not all aerosols are created equal.
Masks and distancing *reduce* but do not *eliminate* transmission. That’s why people should wear masks, but not rely on them completely.
Post by: SayWhat on October 12, 2020, 02:08:19 PM
Post by: NTorch on October 12, 2020, 05:14:23 PM
Quote
A new study by Simon Fraser University (SFU) researchers has found clear evidence that wearing a mask can have a significant impact on the spread of COVID-19. The researchers, from SFU’s Department of Economics, have determined that mask mandates are associated with a 25 per cent or larger weekly reduction in COVID-19 cases.
The finding of their study, still in preprint and not yet peer-reviewed, conclude that mandating indoor masks nationwide in early July could have reduced the weekly number of new cases in Canada by 25 to 40 per cent in mid-August, which translates into 700 to 1,100 fewer cases per week.
The study analysed the impact of mask mandates that were implemented across Ontario’s 34 Public Health Units (PHUs) over the course of two months.
Researchers compared the results of PHUs that adopted mask mandates earlier to those that adopted mandates later. They determined that, in the first few weeks after their introduction, mask mandates were associated with an average weekly reduction of 25 to 31 per cent in newly diagnosed COVID-19 cases, relative to the trend in mask mandate absence, in July and August.
A further Canada-wide analysis with province-level data found a significantly negative association between mask mandates and subsequent COVID-19 case growth – up to a 46 percent average reduction in weekly cases in the first several weeks after adoption.
These results were supported by additional survey data that showed mask mandates increase self-reported mask usage in Canada by 30 percentage points, suggesting that the policy has a significant impact on behaviour.
Jointly, these results suggest that mandating indoor mask wear in public places is a powerful policy measure to slow the spread of COVID-19, with little associated economic disruption in the short term.
The study also found that relaxed restrictions on businesses and gatherings (including retail, restaurants and bars) were positively associated with subsequent COVID-19 case growth – a factor that could offset and obscure the health benefits of mask mandates.
The most stringent restrictions on businesses and gatherings observed in the data were associated with a weekly decrease of 48 to 57 per cent in new cases, relative to the trend in the absence of restrictions.
The study authors note that while the results are significant, their sample period does not allow them to definitively say whether the effect of mask mandates persists or weakens beyond the first few weeks after implementation. However, they conclude that, combined with other policy measures, mask mandates can be a potent policy tool for slowing the spread of COVID-19.
http://www.sfu.ca/sfunews/stories/2020/10/study--mask-mandates-shown-to-significantly-reduce-spread-of-cov.html
Post by: stooges44 on October 14, 2020, 02:38:10 PM
Post by: Lurker on October 15, 2020, 06:28:05 PM
Post by: avromie7 on October 15, 2020, 07:58:04 PM
https://www.foxnews.com/travel/catching-covid-19-plane-wearing-mask-department-of-defenseIt doesn't say how much of the risk is mitigated by masks.
Post by: Lurker on October 15, 2020, 08:08:32 PM
It doesn't say how much of the risk is mitigated by masks.
I'll let the author know and get back to you with exact numbers.
Post by: Euclid on October 15, 2020, 08:37:56 PM
Chris Christie, revealing he spent 7 days in ICU: "I was wrong to not wear a mask .. I hope that my experience shows my fellow citizens that you should follow CDC guidelines in public no matter where you are and wear a mask to protect yourself and others"
— BNO Newsroom (@BNODesk) October 15, 2020
Post by: S209 on October 15, 2020, 10:52:38 PM
It doesn't say how much of the risk is mitigated by masks.Here (https://www.ustranscom.mil/cmd/docs/TRANSCOM%20Report%20Final.pdf) is the referenced study
Quote
As shown in Figure 17, the application of a mask provided significant protection against micron diameter droplets released during the cough simulations and reductions greater than 90% were measured.
Post by: KSMH on October 18, 2020, 01:45:07 PM
A lead investigator on the Danish mask study - the ONLY (as far as I know) randomized trial to see if masks protect from #COVID - was asked when it would be published.
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) October 18, 2020
His answer: “as soon as a journal is brave enough.”
If you think that means the study shows masks work... pic.twitter.com/tm5PFBa5TL
Post by: aygart on October 18, 2020, 02:13:36 PM
Dunno, we already have so many showing that masks are limited in their protection of the wearer. Why would this one suddenly involve bravery?A lead investigator on the Danish mask study - the ONLY (as far as I know) randomized trial to see if masks protect from #COVID - was asked when it would be published.
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) October 18, 2020
His answer: “as soon as a journal is brave enough.”
If you think that means the study shows masks work... pic.twitter.com/tm5PFBa5TL
Post by: Help on October 18, 2020, 03:57:01 PM
Post by: neveryou on October 19, 2020, 05:53:01 PM
I was going to buy sunflower seeds for the flight but I forgot, luckily i had mentos with me, was eating them nice and slowly for about a half hour with no mask
Post by: Lurker on October 19, 2020, 06:03:05 PM
Flew the other day
I was going to buy sunflower seeds for the flight but I forgot, luckily i had mentos with me, was eating them nice and slowly for about a half hour with no mask
Chevreman! You showed 'em! Next time, pretend there's an engine fire so you can open the emergency exits, get a good breeze going at 20k feet.
Post by: neveryou on October 19, 2020, 06:43:05 PM
Chevreman! You showed 'em! Next time, pretend there's an engine fire so you can open the emergency exits, get a good breeze going at 20k feet.Did I trigger you?
Post by: Lurker on October 19, 2020, 08:11:44 PM
Did I trigger you?
Yes, actually. My grandmother had to fly today. Also today, my wife's friend called her in tears. She's in the middle of treatment for breast cancer. Someone from our neighborhood decided that they didn't need to keep their kids home over shabbos while waiting for test results, or even tell anyone that they tested positive after the fact. I'm just tired of people taking "bishvili nivrah ha'olam" to extremes. But I'm glad you were comfortable for 30 minutes.
Post by: pointer on October 19, 2020, 08:15:57 PM
Yes, actually. My grandmother had to fly today. Also today, my wife's friend called her in tears. She's in the middle of treatment for breast cancer. Someone from our neighborhood decided that they didn't need to keep their kids home over shabbos while waiting for test results, or even tell anyone that they tested positive after the fact. I'm just tired of people taking "bishvili nivrah ha'olam" to extremes. But I'm glad you were comfortable for 30 minutes.And if he ate a steak dinner for 30 minutes then it would be perfectly fine?
Post by: Lurker on October 19, 2020, 08:18:55 PM
And if he ate a steak dinner for 30 minutes then it would be perfectly fine?
I don't care what he did. The attitude bothers me. To come here to post how he got around safety measures for his own comfort bothers me. Do what you do, but don't be an a-hole.
Post by: Yehuda57 on October 19, 2020, 08:22:54 PM
I don't care what he did. The attitude bothers me. To come here to post how he got around safety measures for his own comfort bothers me. Do what you do, but don't be an a-hole.
As Chassidim, shouldn't we be doing things even on the slightest of off chances it could help someone else? Even if it makes us uncomfortable? Even if we believe them to be useless? Isn't that the very embodiment of Chossid sorfan?
Post by: yuneeq on October 19, 2020, 08:44:39 PM
Visualization of aerosols. They are different from large droplets. Aerosols stay airborne—that’s why they facilitate coronavirus transmission. #COVID19 (this video from CO2 imaging, but similar phenomenon as smoking & virus aerosols) pic.twitter.com/KUiA4BXQa2
— Eric Feigl-Ding (@DrEricDing) October 11, 2020
Very cool visualizations, I wish they made a vid showing how an uncovered nose affects things.
Post by: mushkovits on October 22, 2020, 12:54:28 AM
Post by: S209 on November 09, 2020, 08:03:43 AM
Now that we finally have a leader that understands masks do work will more start to wear masks? I believe and hope so.
How many more Americans have to die needlessly to stop making this about politics?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/utah-governor-declares-emergency-issues-mask-mandate-we-cannot-afford-to-debate-this-issue/ar-BB1aPTAk
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 09, 2020, 08:14:51 AM
I don't care what he did. The attitude bothers me. To come here to post how he got around safety measures for his own comfort bothers me. Do what you do, but don't be an a-hole.That’s why most people don’t post. but if you would fly as I have many times since Covid, you would know that this is common place.
Post by: CountValentine on November 11, 2020, 04:23:50 PM
https://www.wxyz.com/news/health/ask-dr-nandi/cdc-now-says-masks-protect-both-the-wearers-and-those-around-them-from-covid-19
Post by: S209 on November 11, 2020, 07:49:33 PM
CDC now says masks protect both the wearers and those around them from COVID-19This is the current consensus medical opinion.
https://www.wxyz.com/news/health/ask-dr-nandi/cdc-now-says-masks-protect-both-the-wearers-and-those-around-them-from-covid-19
ETA: Here (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html) is the CDC source.
Post by: ExGingi on November 11, 2020, 08:18:35 PM
This is the current consensus POLITICIZED medical opinion.
ETA: Here (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html) is the CDC source.
FTFY
Post by: CountValentine on November 11, 2020, 08:20:43 PM
FTFYActually now that Trump lost the CDC will be depoliticized.
Post by: S209 on November 11, 2020, 09:27:16 PM
FTFYWhy do you say that? Do you know of a reputable doctor who believes otherwise? I can tell you the names of 10 in Lakewood who have told me that this is their belief.
Post by: ExGingi on November 11, 2020, 09:57:30 PM
Why do you say that? Do you know of a reputable doctor who believes otherwise? I can tell you the names of 10 in Lakewood who have told me that this is their belief.
Do any of those doctors not practice or engage in CYA medicine?
FTR: I don't claim that there is absolutely zero benefit, it's just that the benefit is so small that it's not worth it (talking about the direct health benefit, not about the social or other indirect benefits).
Post by: S209 on November 11, 2020, 10:47:35 PM
Do any of those doctors not practice or engage in CYA medicine?They technically have no direct liability from or obligation toward me, outside of one. I guess one could disregard all medical advice with that rationale.
FTR: I don't claim that there is absolutely zero benefit, it's just that the benefit is so small that it's not worth it (talking about the direct health benefit, not about the social or other indirect benefits).
Post by: ExGingi on November 11, 2020, 11:10:27 PM
They technically have no direct liability from or obligation toward me, outside of one. I guess one could disregard all medical advice with that rationale.
You're focusing on a detail and missing the point.
Post by: CountValentine on November 11, 2020, 11:14:00 PM
FTR: I don't claim that there is absolutely zero benefit, it's just that the benefit is so small that it's not worth it (talking about the direct health benefit, not about the social or other indirect benefits).What science or medical experts do you rely on to back this up?
Post by: Lurker on November 11, 2020, 11:16:05 PM
What science or medical experts do you rely on to back this up?
Dr. I. C. Meself and The Institute Of Wedontneednostinkindoctors.
Post by: ExGingi on November 11, 2020, 11:17:47 PM
What science or medical experts do you rely on to back this up?
Critical reading of reports, studies and opinion pieces claiming otherwise.
Post by: CountValentine on November 11, 2020, 11:22:44 PM
Critical reading of reports, studies and opinion pieces claiming otherwise.Post some links as there are a ton of links in this thread claiming they do help.
Post by: Euclid on November 11, 2020, 11:40:10 PM
Critical reading of reports, studies and opinion pieces claiming otherwise.
I enjoy reading medical news and studies. One of the (many) calamities that came out of this pandemic is that every Chaim Yankel now thinks that he's Meilich Firer or Shuki Berman, and he's fluent in medical literature and research.
Anyone who believes that years of study and experience can be replaced by the reading of some newspaper items and a quick perusing of medical studies is deluding themselves. I overhear laypeople in shul espousing strong opinions about things related to my profession, and I just sit there and nod - while inside I'm laughing. They find a nugget of truth and extrapolate hilariously from that; they don't even know what they don't know. So to think reading a couple news articles and/or medical studies as a layperson can somehow make one more knowledgeable than a doctor is laughable. A doctor knows how to parse medical studies and data in ways that a layman cannot.
For instance, see the Gell-Mann amnesia phenomenon as an example of how using items written for a layperson as a replacement for professional advice is foolhardy. https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/
Post by: CountValentine on November 11, 2020, 11:43:56 PM
I enjoy reading medical news and studies. One of the (many) calamities that came out of this pandemic is that every Chaim Yankel now thinks that he's Meilich Firer or Shuki Berman, and he's fluent in medical literature and research.When you have doctors/experts on both sides of an issue how does a layperson educate themselves to know which side to believe?
Post by: Euclid on November 11, 2020, 11:45:12 PM
When you have doctors/experts on both sides of an issue how does a layperson educate themselves to know which side to believe?Speak to a doctor that you've trusted in the past. Educate yourself by all means, but don't make decisions based on that without discussing it with a doctor you trust.
Post by: yuneeq on November 11, 2020, 11:54:12 PM
Speak to a doctor that you've trusted in the past. Educate yourself by all means, but don't make decisions based on that without discussing it with a doctor you trust.
The problem is people arguing against masks usually trust Dr Quack.
Post by: Lurker on November 12, 2020, 12:00:35 AM
Anyone who believes that years of study and experience can be replaced by reading some news pieces and/or studies is deluding themselves.
FTFY
Post by: Euclid on November 12, 2020, 12:02:07 AM
FTFYThank you. I'll rephrase the original.
Post by: aygart on November 12, 2020, 08:29:03 AM
he's Meilich Firer or Shuki Berman, and he's fluent in medical literature and research.
As amazing of a resource as these people are, your using them as examples of people fluent in medical literature and research is laughable.
As for the main point, that is exactly what happens with anti-vaxxers. They misread research to meet their agenda. when the exact research they call a source is really saying the opposite of their conclusion.
Post by: aygart on November 12, 2020, 08:32:57 AM
Critical reading of reports, studies and opinion pieces claiming otherwise.
Considering your emotional involvement in this issue apparent throughout these forums you may want to reconsider how objective your criticism was.
Post by: Euclid on November 12, 2020, 09:20:55 AM
As amazing of a resource as these people are, your using them as examples of people fluent in medical literature and research is laughable.I b"h have no personal experience with them; their reputation is that they're fluent in medicine even though they're laypeople. Guess that's not entirely true...
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 12, 2020, 09:34:36 AM
I b"h have no personal experience with them; their reputation is that they're fluent in medicine even though they're laypeople. Guess that's not entirely true...Their knowledge of the medical field exceeds anyone on this forum by an unfathomable amount.
Post by: aygart on November 12, 2020, 09:40:44 AM
I b"h have no personal experience with them; their reputation is that they're fluent in medicine even though they're laypeople. Guess that's not entirely true...They're fluent in knowing what is around and who is the expert etc.
Post by: S209 on November 12, 2020, 10:11:44 AM
Their knowledge of the medical field exceeds anyone on this forum by an unfathomable amount.While they might know a lot, do you realize there are actual doctors on these forums? @YankyDoodle and @cks33 come immediately to mind.
I doubt they know much more than doctors, but I could be wrong.
Post by: aygart on November 12, 2020, 10:27:52 AM
Their knowledge of the medical field exceeds anyone on this forum by an unfathomable amount.That does not mean that they have read even one research paper well. There is a very good chance that I have more experience of that from researching for halachic aspects than they do. I have done such research regarding many random subjects from parasitic lifecycles to medicine. That does not mean that I have full knowledge in biology or medicine but I have discussed some papers with their authors and have learned over time how to get what I need from them. Hint: it is rarely found in the abstract.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 12, 2020, 10:45:01 AM
While they might know a lot, do you realize there are actual doctors on these forums? @YankyDoodle and @cks33 come immediately to mind.
I doubt they know much more than doctors, but I could be wrong.
That does not mean that they have read even one research paper well. There is a very good chance that I have more experience of that from researching for halachic aspects than they do. I have done such research regarding many random subjects from parasitic lifecycles to medicine. That does not mean that I have full knowledge in biology or medicine but I have discussed some papers with their authors and have learned over time how to get what I need from them. Hint: it is rarely found in the abstract.BH you never had to deal with them.
Post by: aygart on November 12, 2020, 10:54:19 AM
BH you never had to deal with them.I did.
ETA: I am not trying to say that they didn't go through research papers but rather that they can be extremely effective at what they are doing without having done so. I wouldn't use them as a prime example of ability to go through research papers thoroughly.
Post by: CountValentine on November 14, 2020, 05:06:01 AM
Will those like @ExGingi finally wake up?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-latest-north-dakota-governor-orders-mask-mandate/ar-BB1b04aA
Post by: kosherjid on November 14, 2020, 01:49:41 PM
To me, it looks blown up, exaggerated. (sorry, I don't know in which thread it belongs)
Post by: AsherO on November 15, 2020, 12:03:37 AM
I got this mail on Friday. I would very much like to know if someone has experience with this medication to prevent the virus getting worse.
To me, it looks blown up, exaggerated. (sorry, I don't know in which thread it belongs)
Sounds like a quack...
Post by: kosherjid on November 15, 2020, 12:52:43 AM
Post by: aygart on November 15, 2020, 12:56:15 AM
It's not so simple. Here, this mail circulating around. How can I convince that it's a quack ? Anything online ? I looked, couldnt'find anything. There's also another mail being sent around, to take high, very high doses of vitamins, and this can save you from the virus.If you can't find anything online then what does that tell you about its reliability?
Post by: AsherO on November 15, 2020, 01:01:39 AM
It's not so simple. Here, this mail circulating around. How can I convince that it's a quack ? Anything online ? I looked, couldnt'find anything. There's also another mail being sent around, to take high, very high doses of vitamins, and this can save you from the virus.
It’s actually that simple. There’s a global pandemic with thousands of people dying daily around the world. If a doctor had a technique that was actually working it would likely be discussed elsewhere.
Also, this is a dangerous virus that can potentially wreak havoc on many systems in the body. It’s farfetched that some oil essence mix or vitamins will magically nip it in the bud.
Post by: S209 on November 15, 2020, 01:11:50 AM
It's not so simple. Here, this mail circulating around. How can I convince that it's a quack ? Anything online ? I looked, couldnt'find anything. There's also another mail being sent around, to take high, very high doses of vitamins, and this can save you from the virus.You don’t need a source that it’s a hoax. You need a source that it isn’t.
PS: Forwarding the email to 10 people won’t fix it either.
Post by: ExGingi on November 15, 2020, 01:34:38 AM
You don’t need a source that it’s a hoax. You need a source that it isn’t.
PS: Forwarding the email to 10 people won’t fix it either.
But there's a name and phone number there. :P
Post by: neveryou on November 15, 2020, 11:50:45 AM
when I'm at the ohel make me wear a mask
Post by: Lurker on November 15, 2020, 12:30:07 PM
Nice hypocrisy here
when I'm at the ohel make me wear a mask
What hypocrisy? I see one person without a mask, and he's not the one who makes you wear one at the Ohel.
Post by: gozalim on November 15, 2020, 06:27:00 PM
What hypocrisy? I see one person without a mask, and he's not the one who makes you wear one at the Ohel.and he's had the virus over the summer and has antibodies
Post by: justaregularguy on November 15, 2020, 06:56:40 PM
and he's had the virus over the summer and has antibodiescan’t use that argument . Plenty of ppl had the virus and/or have anti bodies.
Can also be a carrier
Post by: gozalim on November 15, 2020, 09:38:22 PM
can’t use that argument . Plenty of ppl had the virus and/or have anti bodies.confirmed? Or speculation?
Can also be a carrier
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 06:20:35 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/chuck-grassley-87-year-old-iowa-gop-senator-tests-positive-for-covid-19/ar-BB1b5TYM?li=BBnb7Kz
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 17, 2020, 06:32:02 PM
Do republicans just not care or is it still political for them?https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=251A6060-D30F-49EB-B146-674E792A5D45
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/chuck-grassley-87-year-old-iowa-gop-senator-tests-positive-for-covid-19/ar-BB1b5TYM?li=BBnb7Kz
87 year old Senator, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), was seen without a mask, while walking through the corridor before today's Facebook/Twitter CEO hearing.
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 06:50:50 PM
https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=251A6060-D30F-49EB-B146-674E792A5D45...but officer!!! ::)
87 year old Senator, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), was seen without a mask, while walking through the corridor before today's Facebook/Twitter CEO hearing.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 17, 2020, 06:55:25 PM
...but officer!!! ::)Did anyone say that?
Other than the fact that you are trying to paint Republicans in a certain light. Look in the mirror.
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 07:06:43 PM
Did anyone say that?You try to counter my post. Yes you are saying "but officer".
Other than the fact that you are trying to paint Republicans in a certain light. Look in the mirror.
I am not painting anyone. I am saying the majority of Trump supporters as complete idiots when it comes to masks.
Try being honest with yourself, you might like it.
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 17, 2020, 07:19:38 PM
You try to counter my post. Yes you are saying "but officer".How’s the hamster wheel?
I am not painting anyone. I am saying the majority of Trump supporters as complete idiots when it comes to masks.
Try being honest with yourself, you might like it.
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 07:28:36 PM
How’s the hamster wheel?He has covid but expected coming from a Jewish family. :P
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 07:55:24 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/task-force-warns-of-further-deterioration-as-pandemic-worsens/ar-BB1b6pKT?li=BBnb7Kz
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 17, 2020, 07:56:18 PM
He has covid but expected coming from a Jewish family. :PCare to explain?
Post by: Euclid on November 17, 2020, 08:43:42 PM
Care to explain?
The virus is antisemitic
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 08:47:00 PM
Care to explain?Sure, tongue in cheek.
Post by: CountValentine on November 17, 2020, 08:56:44 PM
Post by: KSMH on November 18, 2020, 09:51:10 AM
Do masks really work or is it just something that makes politicians and others feel like they are doing something?
Post by: Lurker on November 18, 2020, 10:06:29 AM
https://t.co/ijUy8hfNTY?amp=1
Do masks really work or is it just something that makes politicians and others feel like they are doing something?
They don't work at all. The world is just one big virtue-signaling theater. Don't be a sheep. Think like a horse. Be a fehrd.
Post by: iluv2travel on November 18, 2020, 10:45:38 AM
https://t.co/ijUy8hfNTY?amp=1
Do masks really work or is it just something that makes politicians and others feel like they are doing something?
I think a lot of people are inclined to agree that its the latter but my personal opinion is to just wear them anyway. No point in fighting city hall right now over this.
They don't work at all. The world is just one big virtue-signaling theater. Don't be a sheep. Think like a horse. Be a fehrd.
Sorry, this is not nice. He put a link to a study done putting mask wearing in question and I don't see his question being derogatory or cynical. We know that everyone has varying opinions on mask wearing and all are entitled to theirs but let's try to be respectful.
Post by: Lurker on November 18, 2020, 11:03:53 AM
I think a lot of people are inclined to agree that its the latter but my personal opinion is to just wear them anyway. No point in fighting city hall right now over this.
Sorry, this is not nice. He put a link to a study done putting mask wearing in question and I don't see his question being derogatory or cynical. We know that everyone has varying opinions on mask wearing and all are entitled to theirs but let's try to be respectful.
Do you feel the same way about vaccines? Everyone is entitled to their opinion? All opinions are validated by posting a study that seems to back that opinion?
Post by: yitzgar on November 18, 2020, 11:22:48 AM
Post by: skyguy918 on November 18, 2020, 11:27:24 AM
This study was posted elsewhere. It was a ridiculous study. For one, they dont even know if the masks were worn properly or if anyone practiced any social distancing.Not to mention the fact that they were only studying whether masks protect the wearer from contracting the virus, not whether they protect others from a mask-wearing infected individual. Or the fact that they explicitly say they're studying whether wearing a mask in settings where others generally aren't wearing masks is effective, as opposed to whether large-scale mask wearing is effective.
Post by: iluv2travel on November 18, 2020, 12:06:49 PM
Do you feel the same way about vaccines? Everyone is entitled to their opinion? All opinions are validated by posting a study that seems to back that opinion?
It has nothing to do with how I (or you) feel about vaccines, it was the tone of your response that I felt wasn't called for. People are entitled to their opinions about vaccines even if I feel they're totally wrong and their proofs are bogus but I will try to show them that in a respectful manner. But that's just me.
Post by: Euclid on November 18, 2020, 12:09:15 PM
I agree that this study may not prove anything at all and am not advocating not wearing masks (on the contrary I believe everyone should wear, especially indoors) but that response still remains disrespectful.Read back through some of the mask arguments that have happened between the OP and the others who've responded. Civility was not abound.
It has nothing to do with how I (or you) feel about vaccines, it was the tone of your response that I felt wasn't called for. People are entitled to their opinions about vaccines even if I feel they're totally wrong and their proofs are bogus but I will try to show them that in a respectful manner. But that's just me.
Post by: Lurker on November 18, 2020, 12:23:24 PM
I agree that this study may not prove anything at all and am not advocating not wearing masks (on the contrary I believe everyone should wear, especially indoors) but that response still remains disrespectful.
It has nothing to do with how I (or you) feel about vaccines, it was the tone of your response that I felt wasn't called for. People are entitled to their opinions about vaccines even if I feel they're totally wrong and their proofs are bogus but I will try to show them that in a respectful manner. But that's just me.
1) The study was rejected for publication by the 3 biggest medical journals. Those journals regularly publish studies which contradict current medical consensus.
2) Saying that masks are a construct of politicians and laypeople is a conspiracy theory with zero basis. Respectfully arguing its merits does nothing more than validate the opinion, which is a huge mistake, IMO.
Post by: KSMH on November 18, 2020, 01:00:45 PM
1/ BREAKING: The only real world covid mask study was just published in Annals of Internal Medicine concluding the infection rate of mask vs no mask "was not statistically significant".
— Yinon Weiss (@yinonw) November 18, 2020
How will people "follow the science" now? Choose your science.https://t.co/vBDgo43sFB
Post by: iluv2travel on November 18, 2020, 01:01:38 PM
Read back through some of the mask arguments that have happened between the OP and the others who've responded. Civility was not abound.
That's true, but 2 wrongs don't make a right. Can we perhaps change it going forward? Might be worth a shot.
1) The study was rejected for publication by the 3 biggest medical journals. Those journals regularly publish studies which contradict current medical consensus.
2) Saying that masks are a construct of politicians and laypeople is a conspiracy theory with zero basis. Respectfully arguing its merits does nothing more than validate the opinion, which is a huge mistake, IMO.
I'm afraid to agree with you ;D (albeit not fully because I still believe very much in respect and think there is a way to assert respectfully what you strongly believe without validating an opinion you totally disagree with and think is crazy).
Need to proceed with caution ;).
Post by: aygart on November 18, 2020, 01:03:40 PM
This study was posted elsewhere. It was a ridiculous study. For one, they dont even know if the masks were worn properly or if anyone practiced any social distancing.There is an argument to made that such data is what matters to evaluate mask mandates. What matters is not what happens when worn properly but rather what happens the way the compliance happens in the real world.
Post by: PlatinumGuy on November 18, 2020, 01:12:09 PM
The most important question IMO is how many of the people wearing masks who got infected live in households where everybody wore a mask.
Post by: skyguy918 on November 18, 2020, 01:30:19 PM
There is an argument to made that such data is what matters to evaluate mask mandates. What matters is not what happens when worn properly but rather what happens the way the compliance happens in the real world.The flip side of that is that it only shows what happens when a small number of people where masks by suggestion, not what happens when large percentages of the population
Post by: iluv2travel on November 18, 2020, 01:32:54 PM
The flip side of that is that it only shows what happens when a small number of people where masks by suggestion, not what happens when large percentages of the population where masks by mandate.
*wear masks (not where masks)
ETA: You gotta fix it both times ;)
Post by: biobook on November 18, 2020, 02:35:05 PM
1) The study was rejected for publication by the 3 biggest medical journals. Those journals regularly publish studies which contradict current medical consensus.Where did you see this?
Post by: Lurker on November 18, 2020, 02:45:14 PM
Where did you see this?
The study's authors have said it publicly. It's been an ongoing saga for a while now. The study was ready for publication in October, but they couldn't find a journal that would publish it. The authors refused to discuss the study or its findings until it was published, and they wouldn't say why they were rejected from NEJM, JAMA, and The Lancet, other than "they weren't brave enough."
Post by: yitzgar on November 18, 2020, 04:05:34 PM
There is an argument to made that such data is what matters to evaluate mask mandates. What matters is not what happens when worn properly but rather what happens the way the compliance happens in the real world.Absolutely. But to frame it as though masks don't work, is false. There are actually people out there who do wear masks properly, and it isn't right to discourage them from doing so.
In fact, this is likely a reason the CDC didn't recommend masks originally, because they felt there wouldn't be much benefit if most people dont wear them properly. Ironically, the same people who harp on that flip-flopping as "proof" that masks don't work, will run around with this study as well, not realizing/ignoring that it is lack of proper usage which was the cause of both. (And even more ironically, in my experience, it's usually the same people who don't wear masks properly, even when they do wear them)
Post by: yuneeq on November 18, 2020, 05:34:33 PM
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
Do masks really work or is it just something that makes politicians and others feel like they are doing something?
I believe the infection rate is way too low to make good conclusions from this study, only 2% infected over 2 months is really low whether masked or otherwise. It suggests that there's an overarching cause for the low infection rate, it may have to do with social distancing norms, which the researchers also recommended for everyone. In one study it shows many get infected from a family member or while dining, so as PlatinumGuy suggested, masks won't help you when you're at home or in other places not wearing a mask. What would be more interesting is a study showing how masks perform in non-socially distanced environments.
Additionally, the study itself acknowledges that it doesn't make an "assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others."
Post by: ExGingi on November 18, 2020, 08:21:21 PM
In the summer people complained that masks were too hot. What is the excuse now? Masks are a nice way to keep warm and they 'mask' bad breath so all the money you can save on gum and breath mints. https://t.co/KTfRxkNrr1
— Daniel Griffin MD PhD (@DanielGriffinMD) November 19, 2020
Still hurt ears, still fog up glasses, still make breathing more difficult, still muffle speech.
Post by: PlatinumGuy on November 18, 2020, 08:27:05 PM
I find my KN95 doesn't fog up my glasses (3 ply-s were horrible), and yes I often leave it on while walking outdoors just for the warming effect.In the summer people complained that masks were too hot. What is the excuse now? Masks are a nice way to keep warm and they 'mask' bad breath so all the money you can save on gum and breath mints. https://t.co/KTfRxkNrr1
— Daniel Griffin MD PhD (@DanielGriffinMD) November 19, 2020
Still hurt ears, still fog up glasses, still make breathing more difficult, still muffle speech.
Post by: CountValentine on November 18, 2020, 08:27:24 PM
Still hurt ears, still fog up glasses, still make breathing more difficult, still muffle speech....and still saves lives!
Post by: skyguy918 on November 19, 2020, 12:15:02 AM
Still hurt ears, still fog up glasses, still make breathing more difficult, still muffle speech.The only one of those I'll concede to you is the last. The rest are a product of not selecting the right mask for you.
Post by: ExGingi on November 19, 2020, 01:32:00 PM
Post by: ExGingi on November 19, 2020, 01:34:49 PM
The only one of those I'll concede to you is the last. The rest are a product of not selecting the right mask for you.
I am not arguing or fighting, and definitely not seeking concessions. I just posted comments of fact in response to Dr. Griffin's tweet. As a person who doesn't regularly wear a mask, I am at the mercy of whatever is available at the exact moment (I've also tried buying several, and found none that I was comfortable with, and am not spending time and effort trying on different types to find what is least problematic).
Post by: Kobe Bryant on November 22, 2020, 09:38:26 PM
#NewJersey
— Shane B. Murphy (@shanermurph) November 23, 2020
*language warning*
New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy was accosted by a group filming for not wearing a mask while out for dinner with his family. pic.twitter.com/GlwCgFfJJX
Post by: PlatinumGuy on November 23, 2020, 12:56:05 PM
Counties that required masks had a 6% reduction in new cases, which doesn't sound like much, but counties without a mask requirement had a 100% increase (i.e., doubling). https://t.co/Z0RYjnSiMR
— Linsey Marr (@linseymarr) November 23, 2020
Post by: ExGingi on November 26, 2020, 05:42:35 PM
Post by: neveryou on December 05, 2020, 06:14:07 PM
Post by: S209 on December 05, 2020, 09:47:56 PM
https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/featured/1925884/you-and-your-prayer-book-can-get-off-frum-woman-wearing-mask-thrown-off-delta-flight-for-davening-in-her-seat-video.htmlAbsolutely disgusting no matter whether she was mask compliant or not. This is probably the wrong thread.
Post by: aygart on December 09, 2020, 12:20:35 PM
Post by: ExGingi on December 10, 2020, 08:47:36 AM
Also one of the most severe current cases of COVID-19 in Crown Heights is someone who was extremely careful.
Post by: yitzgar on December 10, 2020, 08:54:09 AM
I just heard this morning of a certain bochur, who has spoken to me a few times, and has been to my office always religiously wearing a face mask over his mouth and nose, to the extent that his speech was muffled, got COVID-19 (and is currently recovering).What type of mask? Was he indoors for extended periods of time with others? (Masked or nonmasked)
Also one of the most severe current cases of COVID-19 in Crown Heights is someone who was extremely careful.
Everyone has their own idea of being careful. The question is if it's the right type of careful.
That being said, I think everyone knows people who are careful in general who caught it. Remember, they can always catch it at home. A strong chain with a weak link can still break.
(What also has to be taken into account is the percentage of those who are careful who catch it vs those who aren't careful who catch it)
Post by: Euclid on December 10, 2020, 08:55:19 AM
Also one of the most severe current cases of COVID-19 in Crown Heights is someone who was extremely careful.Wow! It took 9 months for him to finally catch it! (He should have a Refuah shleima!)
Post by: yuneeq on December 10, 2020, 09:59:38 AM
Post by: Lurker on December 10, 2020, 10:33:06 AM
Wearing a mask around maskless people should at most only slightly prevent COVID if you're not also wearing eye protection. Though wearing a mask will decrease the viral load/severity of disease. Not sure why this is never mentioned.
It has been. Along with the whole "masks protect others from you more than they protect you from others" shpeil. It boggles my mind how no one ever expresses shock when someone is injured in a car accident while wearing a seat belt and driving carefully.
Post by: aygart on December 10, 2020, 10:37:53 AM
It has been.
Really, now?
Post by: yuneeq on December 10, 2020, 10:42:53 AM
It has been. Along with the whole "masks protect others from you more than they protect you from others" shpeil. It boggles my mind how no one ever expresses shock when someone is injured in a car accident while wearing a seat belt and driving carefully.
I really haven't seen eye protection mentioned at all. In the beginning of COVID there was a lot of discussion how the virus can enter from the nose, throat, and eyes, but for some reason all the mask discussions and articles I've read since then have never mentioned the eyes.
Post by: Euclid on December 10, 2020, 10:44:31 AM
I really haven't seen eye protection mentioned at all. In the beginning of COVID there was a lot of discussion how the virus can enter from the nose, throat, and eyes, but for some reason all the mask discussions and articles I've read since then have never mentioned the eyes.Guessing most people here wear glasses ;)
(Yeah I know that they don't fully cover.)
Post by: avromie7 on December 10, 2020, 10:52:20 AM
Guessing most people here wear corrective lenses ;)FTFY. Contact lenses would do even less to protect the eyes.
(Yeah I know that they don't fully cover.)
Post by: ExGingi on December 10, 2020, 12:51:10 PM
Guessing most people here wear glasses ;)
(Yeah I know that they don't fully cover.)
The bochur I mentioned wears glasses.
Post by: ExGingi on December 10, 2020, 12:51:49 PM
It has been. Along with the whole "masks protect others from you, PERIOD".FTFY
Post by: aygart on December 10, 2020, 01:05:46 PM
FTFYNever saw that one
Post by: PlatinumGuy on December 16, 2020, 10:32:02 PM
A new CDC report looks at COVID-19 infections in children and Mississippi and finds the vast majority are not linked to schools and daycares, unless those facilities don’t enforce strict mask-wearing: https://t.co/h9ZA3aSiFq
— Lauren Camera (@laurenonthehill) December 16, 2020
Post by: AsherO on December 17, 2020, 11:35:03 PM
A new CDC report looks at COVID-19 infections in children and Mississippi and finds the vast majority are not linked to schools and daycares, unless those facilities don’t enforce strict mask-wearing: https://t.co/h9ZA3aSiFq
— Lauren Camera (@laurenonthehill) December 16, 2020
What percentage of schools and daycares (especially daycares) enforce strict mask wearing?
Post by: PlatinumGuy on December 21, 2020, 10:47:58 PM
A new STAT-Harris poll shows that 75% of Americans would support President-elect Joe Biden issuing a mask mandate. https://t.co/oimsEHnDo7 pic.twitter.com/ZxFP98cDte
— STAT (@statnews) December 22, 2020
Post by: Jellybelly on December 21, 2020, 11:36:30 PM
I’mA new STAT-Harris poll shows that 75% of Americans would support President-elect Joe Biden issuing a mask mandate. https://t.co/oimsEHnDo7 pic.twitter.com/ZxFP98cDte
— STAT (@statnews) December 22, 2020
Curious how many of those asked are senior citizens and how many are college mis-educated
Post by: iluv2travel on December 21, 2020, 11:39:31 PM
I’m
Curious how many of those asked are senior citizens and how many are college mis-educated
And being that everything in this country is political (even though this shouldn't be), they should say which political party the respondents affiliated with.
Post by: S209 on December 22, 2020, 01:33:28 AM
I’m
Curious how many of those asked are senior citizens and how many are college mis-educated
And being that everything in this country is political (even though this shouldn't be), they should say which political party the respondents affiliated with.https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/10/poll-increasing-bipartisan-majority-americans-support-mask-wearing/
Post by: stooges44 on March 18, 2021, 02:45:30 PM
Post by: Lurker on March 18, 2021, 03:06:53 PM
https://breaking911.com/must-watch-rand-paul-snaps-at-dr-fauci-over-masks/
The irony of Paul creating political theater to complain about perceived political theater...
Post by: Kobe Bryant on March 31, 2021, 07:30:29 PM
The irony of Paul creating political theater to complain about perceived political theater...Fauci is nothing more than an overpaid disingenuous political actor.
Post by: Lurker on March 31, 2021, 09:17:47 PM
Fauci is nothing more than an overpaid disingenuous political actor.
I'm not a Fauci fan, but his 40+ year career says he's a bit more than that. And regardless of Paul being right or wrong, the irony still stands.
Post by: Jellybelly on April 01, 2021, 11:56:58 AM
I'm not a Fauci fan, but his 40+ year career says he's a bit more than that. And regardless of Paul being right or wrong, the irony still stands.Longevity didn’t mean much, just look at Biden
Post by: Lurker on April 01, 2021, 12:12:45 PM
Longevity didn’t mean much, just look at Biden
To make a living as a politician, getting reelected in Delaware, vs a career in medical research and policy, dealing with things like AIDS, Ebola, and SARS... not quite the same thing. Again, not a Fauci fan, and I haven't been since last April (you can look it up), but to minimize who he is and what he's accomplished by denigrating him as "nothing more than an overpaid disingenuous political actor" is wrong, IMO.
Post by: TimT on April 17, 2021, 08:49:59 PM