The big problem I keep seeing is the morons who wear a mask under their nose. It's difficult to get everybody to wear a mask, and everybody has to wear one for them to be effective. Their likely more effective at trapping viruses going out than coming in, so the people with the mask not covering their noses are likely causing issues even if everybody else is wearing one properly.
that and cloth masks. The biggest issue is aerosols, and cloth masks 1) dont fit tight enough, and 2) are worn so long that the moisture dries out and creates even more aerosols. Procedure masks work, but you need to change them out every 4-6 hours. Everything else is just cheese-grater masturbation.
The study in this case is actual covid cases, with real people, wearing masks the way people actually wear them. It's not a lab experiment.
The study shows what would be common sense if nobody had politicized it - While using N95 masks properly provides nearly 100% protection, doing a half-ass job only provides half the protection.
Half of 100% protection is 50% - cutting COVID cases in half.
Cloth masks are LESS effective than N95 masks. Less doesn't mean zero. As demonstrated by this study, for anyone who forgot what "less' means.
hmmm and this was using only delta confirmed cases? Im not anti-mask, but Im pretty sure the only way out of this mess is going to be vaccination and boosters. As one person pointed out, newsom's mixed messages was that masks work, but the first thing he re-opened was bars and venues where you unmask. Its not an indictment, its an observation. IMO, when we lifted mask mandates, we should have done it for vaccinated for an extended period of time in order to give incentive to be vaccinated. I get that people
> Would they do scientific studies and conclude that "yes, crosses do stop the spread of covid"?
If you don't care for science, you can just look for yourself, with your own eyes.
After you (or someone else) has worn a white mask for a couple hours, take a look at the inside. That's yellowish brown stuff you can is dried up mucus and saliva droplets. You can see it for yourself.
Each of these droplets was around 10-60um before drying up and would carry around 10000 or so copies of the virus.
This study was about improving proper mask use, based on the assumption that proper mask use will reduce COVID case counts. This wasn't really a mask study, per se, but rather a study on managing and improving mask use.
As I read it, the result COVID cases counts were 11% less, after tripling "proper" mask use.
CDCs analysis of mandated areas vs non-mandates areas shows about 0.5% reduction in COVID case counts.
Masks obviously do *something*, something pretty minor. But even that minor impact requires signifi
Mandates != Masks In some areas, mandates may even reduce mask use. If you look at different places with mandates and not, you're attempting to measure the effectiveness of mandates, not of masks. And have confounding variables because they are different places with cultures that accept or reject mandates. Even more so, high case rates will of course CAUSE measures such as mandates. As will things like having a bunch of people closed up in a room together all day (school). That is, places that need mandates w
Yes! A reasonable mask statement! I note one thing: valve-less N95s.
There are cloth masks available that have a HEPA filter sewn into the mask. HEPA filters are what are used in the hospital rooms of transplant patients – people with zero immune systems – to prevent any infections. These "cloth w/HEPA" masks are much better in protection level than regular cloth, as HEPA filters have very tiny holes to catch aerosols and tiny particles.
Yes! A reasonable mask statement! I note one thing: valve-less N95s.
Cloth masks are less effective than ported N95 masks, too. Anyone claiming otherwise either hasn't thought it through or failed high-school math.
Assuming all else is equal, the probability of spreading COVID to others can be expressed as (Pi * Pt) where Pi is the probability of getting infected and Pt is the probability of transmitting it to someone else.
For a cloth mask, Pi = Pt = 20%, for a total probability of 4% (.2 *.2 =.04).
For a ported N95 mask, Pi = 1%, and pt = 100%, for a total probability of
Given a choice of sitting next to someone with a ported N95 mask or a cloth mask, I'll pick the ported N95 mask any time. It's just common sense.
As they say ignorance is bliss.
Maybe they are wearing an N95 mask because someone they were around was infected or they are feeling sick?
That's equally likely for the person wearing the cloth mask, unless you're under a mask mandate and in a place where a mask would be required under that mandate. So that doesn't meaningfully affect the equation, because it affects both sides equally.
Maybe they took it because they forgot their favorite cloth mask at home or left in the wash and fished it out of an old box of junk from their garage.
If you have to prop up your opinion with a pile of hypotheticals for it to hold up, then it isn't based in science. It's based in fear and paranoia. Using the numbers above, the ported N95 provides 4x better protection, assuming all else is equal. So those s
Cloth masks are LESS effective than N95 masks. Less doesn't mean zero. As demonstrated by this study, for anyone who forgot what "less' means.
A big fat ZERO *IS* the conclusion of this study WRT cloth masks.
"We find clear evidence that surgical masks lead to a relative reduction in symptomatic seroprevalence of 11.2%"... "For cloth masks, we find an imprecise zero"
Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing.
-- Ambrose Bierce
If worn properly (Score:5, Insightful)
The big problem I keep seeing is the morons who wear a mask under their nose. It's difficult to get everybody to wear a mask, and everybody has to wear one for them to be effective. Their likely more effective at trapping viruses going out than coming in, so the people with the mask not covering their noses are likely causing issues even if everybody else is wearing one properly.
Re: (Score:0)
The study shows that 50% is half of 100% (Score:5, Informative)
The study in this case is actual covid cases, with real people, wearing masks the way people actually wear them. It's not a lab experiment.
The study shows what would be common sense if nobody had politicized it -
While using N95 masks properly provides nearly 100% protection, doing a half-ass job only provides half the protection.
Half of 100% protection is 50% - cutting COVID cases in half.
Cloth masks are LESS effective than N95 masks.
Less doesn't mean zero. As demonstrated by this study, for anyone who forgot what "less' means.
Re:The study shows that 50% is half of 100% (Score:5, Insightful)
No sir, the study did NOT count virus particles, droplets of phlegm, or anything of the kind you might imagine. The study counted covid cases.
Promoting mask use = fewer covid cases. That's what the study measured.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
> Would they do scientific studies and conclude that "yes, crosses do stop the spread of covid"?
If you don't care for science, you can just look for yourself, with your own eyes.
After you (or someone else) has worn a white mask for a couple hours, take a look at the inside. That's yellowish brown stuff you can is dried up mucus and saliva droplets. You can see it for yourself.
Each of these droplets was around 10-60um before drying up and would carry around 10000 or so copies of the virus.
Re: (Score:2)
This study was about improving proper mask use, based on the assumption that proper mask use will reduce COVID case counts. This wasn't really a mask study, per se, but rather a study on managing and improving mask use.
As I read it, the result COVID cases counts were 11% less, after tripling "proper" mask use.
CDCs analysis of mandated areas vs non-mandates areas shows about 0.5% reduction in COVID case counts.
Masks obviously do *something*, something pretty minor. But even that minor impact requires signifi
Re: (Score:2)
Mandates != Masks
In some areas, mandates may even reduce mask use.
If you look at different places with mandates and not, you're attempting to measure the effectiveness of mandates, not of masks. And have confounding variables because they are different places with cultures that accept or reject mandates. Even more so, high case rates will of course CAUSE measures such as mandates. As will things like having a bunch of people closed up in a room together all day (school). That is, places that need mandates w
Re: (Score:3)
It's much worse than 50%, though. According to TFS, the efficiency of cloth masks was measured at 37%, compared to surgical at 95%.
Re: (Score:2)
But N95 is not a 'surgical mask'
not the 'surgical mask' the general public wears
Re: (Score:3)
Cloth masks are LESS effective than N95 masks.
Yes! A reasonable mask statement! I note one thing: valve-less N95s.
There are cloth masks available that have a HEPA filter sewn into the mask. HEPA filters are what are used in the hospital rooms of transplant patients – people with zero immune systems – to prevent any infections. These "cloth w/HEPA" masks are much better in protection level than regular cloth, as HEPA filters have very tiny holes to catch aerosols and tiny particles.
Re: (Score:2)
Cloth masks are LESS effective than N95 masks.
Yes! A reasonable mask statement! I note one thing: valve-less N95s.
Cloth masks are less effective than ported N95 masks, too. Anyone claiming otherwise either hasn't thought it through or failed high-school math.
Assuming all else is equal, the probability of spreading COVID to others can be expressed as (Pi * Pt) where Pi is the probability of getting infected and Pt is the probability of transmitting it to someone else.
Re: (Score:2)
Given a choice of sitting next to someone with a ported N95 mask or a cloth mask, I'll pick the ported N95 mask any time. It's just common sense.
As they say ignorance is bliss.
Maybe they are wearing an N95 mask because someone they were around was infected or they are feeling sick?
That's equally likely for the person wearing the cloth mask, unless you're under a mask mandate and in a place where a mask would be required under that mandate. So that doesn't meaningfully affect the equation, because it affects both sides equally.
Maybe they took it because they forgot their favorite cloth mask at home or left in the wash and fished it out of an old box of junk from their garage.
If you have to prop up your opinion with a pile of hypotheticals for it to hold up, then it isn't based in science. It's based in fear and paranoia. Using the numbers above, the ported N95 provides 4x better protection, assuming all else is equal. So those s
Re: (Score:3)
Cloth masks are LESS effective than N95 masks.
Less doesn't mean zero. As demonstrated by this study, for anyone who forgot what "less' means.
A big fat ZERO *IS* the conclusion of this study WRT cloth masks.
"We find clear evidence that surgical masks lead to a relative reduction in symptomatic seroprevalence of 11.2%" ... "For cloth masks, we find an imprecise zero"