Trump: CDC Recommends Cloth Face Covering To Protect Against Coronavirus 145
President Trump says the CDC now recommends using a cloth face covering to protect against coronavirus, but said he does not plan to do so himself. CNBC reports: Trump stressed that the recommendations were merely voluntary, not required. "I don't think I'm going to be doing it" he said as he announced the new guidance. The CDC's website explained that the recommendations were updated following new studies that some infected people can transmit the coronavirus even without displaying symptoms of the disease.
"In light of this new evidence, CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain," such as in grocery stores or pharmacies, "especially in areas of significant community-based transmission," the CDC says. Developing...
"In light of this new evidence, CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain," such as in grocery stores or pharmacies, "especially in areas of significant community-based transmission," the CDC says. Developing...
Liberal agenda (Score:5, Funny)
Trump is right, this is the radical left's way of boiling the frog. First masks then getting all Americans to eventually wear hijabs.
I, for one, am not falling for it!
Re:Liberal agenda (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but just think how the Mexican illegal rapist bad hombres respond to you when you're wearing a mask: "Es un bandito!!!" ... and then they cut you LARGE elbow room.
Your comment reminds me of the statement All unicorns have ears and horns. But do they exist in any numbers? Twenty five years ago when the Mexican economy was in shambles. Today, not so. Mexican immigrants into the USA do not in any numbers, want to relocate. It is the people from Further south of Mexico.
Re: (Score:2)
Um... didn't we already know this? (Score:3, Insightful)
The CDC's website explained that the recommendations were updated following new studies that some infected people can transmit the coronavirus even without displaying symptoms of the disease.
Didn't just about everyone -- except the Governors of Georgia and Florida [cnn.com] (who apparently, "just learned") -- know over a month ago that asymptomatic people could be infectious?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes this was known, but they wanted to prevent hoarding of those N95 masks that are needed for people actually exposed to people with the virus.
However, at least here, there is a strong number of statements that using a cloth is correct and you should *not* be wearing N95 masks as those are reserved for medical personal. From what I have seen this is working, wearing a real N95 mask is now looked quite down on and people are not doing it out of social shaming. And everybody is wearing paper or cloth masks.
Re: (Score:3)
Such stupidity all around. A lot more people are going to die because of such policies and attitudes. Meanwhile the healthcare workers using the few effective masks are just dumping them in the trash after they see each patient apparently following idiotic and wasteful guidelines that assume the masks are ubiquitous and free and grow on trees in a sort of N95 Eden.
Nothing is going to prevent intelligent people from hoarding the effective respiratory protection that actually works, but yes a lot of dumb, obe
Re: (Score:2)
The cloth masks are to prevent an infected person wearing them from expelling coronavirus into the air. I agree they do little to prevent a person without coronavirus from getting it.
People already knew, tons of people said not to (Score:2, Informative)
Didn't just about everyone -- except the Governors
Put away the partisan hack job Hacky Mc Hackface, there were tons of people on both right and left saying not to wear masks - in part because they claimed normies wouldn't know how to wear them right, thus they were worthless.
Of course, any technologist inherently knows about defense in depth, so any amount of protection is better than none.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't just about everyone -- except the Governors
Put away the partisan hack job Hacky Mc Hackface, there were tons of people on both right and left saying not to wear masks - in part because they claimed normies wouldn't know how to wear them right, thus they were worthless.
The thing everyone knew except the Governors mentioned was *not* about wearing masks, but that asymptomatic people could be infectious. The Governor of Georgia was quoted just the other day that he just learned about this even though it's been pretty common knowledge for over a month -- Mr I Can't Read a Complete Sentence Face. :-)
If you're going to complain about something, make sure it's the right thing...
Re: People already knew, tons of people said not t (Score:2)
What are you talking about? The public was told not to wear masks because there was already a shortage of masks, and each mask on a face of a doctor prevents more spreading than a mask on a face of an average citizen. Yes, they sold it to the public as "it won't do much for you" because they were trying to avoid a run on masks like people did on toilet paper (a completely irrational move too).
Re: (Score:2)
If the defensive route will result in your
Re: People already knew, tons of people said not (Score:2)
If you use the same mask on an average citizen under shelter-in-place, vs. on a doctor or nurse who is seeing sick people all day long (not necessarily all with COVID-19, some with other diseases making them more vulnerable), the benefit "per mask" is maximized, both in terms of limiting transmission and protecting the healthcare worker. If you have limited number of masks, you want to maximize the per-mask benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
You also have to consider the fact that intelligent people are going to know you are lying and that they are going to point it out to less intelligent people and that everyone is going to trust what you say a lot less in the future once you have a reputation as a strategic liar.
Both the CDC and WHO now have such a reputation and in the future they will have to deal with the fact that, like North Korea or China, anything they say in the future is going to be taken with a huge amount of salt by a large segmen
Re: (Score:2)
Put away the partisan hack job Hacky Mc Hackface, there were tons of people on both right and left saying not to wear masks
That's true. But what on earth does it have to do with the GP's comment? You're the only one here talking about masks. Go find another thread to rant in.
Does the CDC also... (Score:2)
recommend washing said cloths? A face covering reused is almost worse than no face covering at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it worse? Overnight the germs migrate to the other side of it?
Re: (Score:2)
Because it's new and uncomfortable, and you might subconsciously touch the outside of it.
Re: (Score:3)
The goal of the cloth face mask is to prevent your germs from infecting others, not vice-versa.
Re: (Score:2)
The goal of the cloth face mask is to prevent your germs from infecting others, not vice-versa.
This... The face mask primary goal is as a barrier to help prevent carriers from infecting others. It doesn't do much for a healthy person.
The real barrier is the 6 feet rule as the evidence to date says that it can't survive long enough outside of the host to travel that distance.
Re: (Score:2)
This... The face mask primary goal is as a barrier to help prevent carriers from infecting others. It doesn't do much for a healthy person.
The real barrier is the 6 feet rule as the evidence to date says that it can't survive long enough outside of the host to travel that distance.
6 feet is the normal maximum distance most people's breathe spray carries while breathing and talking, hence the 6 feet rule. Closer than 6 feet and moisture form your breathe, along with whatever bugs you have, reaches the person you are discoursing with - the closer you are, the denser the spray pattern.
The virus itself is is remarkably resilient, especially compared to common viral infections (flu or colds). It can survive on any surface for hours (4 hours on copper!) and for days on many commo
Re: (Score:2)
So I wear it for 15 minutes and take it off, now it's no good at all I need a new one. But if I wear if for an 8 hour shift it's good that whole time?
The point of this cloth covering is not that it's as good as the expensive but unobtainable masks, but because it will stop some transmission via water vapor as you breath or cough. Some is not all, but at least it's not none.
Re: (Score:2)
So you recommend no mask at all? The better masks are even harder to find than TP.
But...but... (Score:1)
...doesn't the orange paint rub off?
To protect OTHERS, not you (Score:5, Informative)
This is almost entirely about stopping you spreading the virus to other people. It basically stops you spitting on other people, even as you talk, which some experts are now suggesting is the primary way the virus spreads. This gets relegated to a confusing footnote in the CNBC article and could be explained so easily, but now we're going to see a rush on masks because people will think it will stop them from getting infected in the first place, which it won't really do.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. As the Czech campaign says, "Your mask protects me, my mask protects you". https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
The messaging should certainly promote homemade masks, so we can continue prioritizing medical-grade masks for health care (and then other frontline workers).
Re:To protect OTHERS, not you (Score:4, Interesting)
This 7-minute video [youtube.com] explains in detail why and how mask wearing is an essential part of the overall strategy to stop the virus from spreading. I recommend it for anyone who's not quite convinced yet.
Re: (Score:2)
The video I posted includes clips of the same footage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The government could have been forcing companies to make N95 masks at rapid paces _months_ ago, but they didn't. They just blame. Trump's government is beyond incompetent. Their strategy for winning the next election is to say, "If you want rid of me, risk getting sick at your local polling place. Mailing it in will not be allowed. An oh look, most democratic polling places have long lines.. So sad."
Politically I don't understand what he is thinking. It will be older people who tend to vote republican who have the most to lose.
Re: (Score:2)
now we're going to see a rush on masks because people will think it will stop them from getting infected in the first place
In this way, people's stupidity will elegantly cancel out their selfishness.
(selfish for caring about themselves, stupid for thinking the masks will help protect themselves).
Re: (Score:2)
I have been wondering, once the initial panic dies off and the message gets out that wearing a mask won't help you personally but is about protecting everyone else, if the demand for masks will die off very rapidly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
it may cause them to not social distance so much due to feeling the mask protects them.
My experience is the exact opposite.
I started wearing a mask last week. The first thing I noticed was that people stay away from me.
Re: (Score:2)
This may change soonish in that when everyone has been wearing masks for a few weeks + social distancing, people become desperate enough for human contact and feel safe enough that it may cause the effect.
Right now though, it's more of a mark of a leper.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
When someone gets too close to me, I start coughing.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok now that's just being a selfish dick. No need to be an asshole. Wearing the mask should be enough. If you are only wearing an N95 mask consider upgrading to something a bit more intimidating like a full face respirator and wear a complete Tyvek suit if you can find one. People might think you have Ebola.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok now that's just being a selfish dick. No need to be an asshole. Wearing the mask should be enough.
If it was the other guy who was infected, then NO, wearing a mask yourself would NOT be enough.
If the other guy was being selfish enough to both not wear a mask and also go near other people, then that guy was the asshole. A few cough to gently remind him to move away is merely being sensible.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are one of the few wearing a mask, people will be scared that you have the virus. Once most everyone is wearing a mask and it's the new normal, things are likely to change.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are one of the few wearing a mask, people will be scared that you have the virus.
If it keeps them away added bonus.
Re: (Score:2)
True, until it becomes the new normal, then we will see.
Re: (Score:2)
Once most everyone is wearing a mask and it's the new normal, things are likely to change.
I went to the grocery store 3 days ago. Half the people in the store were wearing masks, including both customers and employees.
So it is already the new normal.
The number of people wearing masks may go up, but so will the number of people infected.
Re: (Score:2)
Not many masks being worn here yet. I do note that the official advice is changing to masks help protect others.
Re: (Score:2)
My elderly dad now wears a full face silicone respirator with dual particulate N95 rated cartridges as well as plastic gloves whenever he goes out to the supermarket. He is almost 80 and is not particularly in the mood to die this year. He is shopping for P100 cartridges for it as well as for $500 Tyvek PAPR suits with belt mounted HEPA filters. He seems unconcerned with looks people might give him for looking like he is a CDC investigator from the film Contagion or with people who might think he should sa
Re: (Score:2)
People also touch their faces more when wearing a mask
My sample (size 1, me) suggests the opposite is true. There was a quote going around from some emeritus professor in virology who'd also advised people to weak masks to reduce their own face-touching.
I wonder what the actual truth is?
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to say, because the amount of misinformation around the issue has been staggering. But conventional wisdom is that people touch their faces tens if not hundreds of times a day without realising it. It's subconscious.
And having a foreign item on your face is likely going to make you do this subconscious touching more, just like your tongue going at that point in your mouth that feels weird after dentist's visit for a while. It's a process of adapting "that new and strange thing" as a part of one's
Re: (Score:2)
There definitely are ways to brute force that problem [dailymail.co.uk]. It's just a matter of how far you are willing to go. With a full face respirator it doesn't matter how many times you try to touch your face.
Re: (Score:2)
Full face shields are actually a fairly common thing among certain high risk groups now. A good example of one is dentists. Here in Finland, they bought out entire stock of full face shields from hardware stores.
Because due to their occupation, they get a lot of small droplets flying out of their patient's mouths at high velocity. To protect against them, full fibreglass face shield is by far the best solution.
After the procedure is done, you just wipe/wash it and you can go to the next patient.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I am very glad that my elderly dad has a full face respirator. He is being so careful and taking the risk seriously. It is too bad that more at risk Americans are not doing that. A full face respirator with P100 or N95 cartridges costs like $130 last time I checked and that is quite affordable for a lot elderly Americans. Compared to the cost of a coffin and a funeral or to a week on a ventilator it is very cheap indeed. I guess Amazon has stopped selling them except to hospitals but they may still be a
Re: (Score:2)
Another funny detail is that a lot of military surplus stores (I shop at varusteleka about twice a year for fun/weird surplus stuff) used to have older military gas masks for next to nothing.
I'm regretting a bit not buying one of those right now. I could have had a mask and a bunch of spare filters for less than 100EUR. I'm even trained in their usage as a part of my mandatory military conscription service having been a medic team leader.
Should've also bought a Gestapo-style military surplus coat and USSR s
Re: (Score:2)
Never have the urge to adjust the mask and adjust it? I've noticed how much I adjust my glasses.
Yeah, that won't help AT ALL. (Score:2)
Try this: Hold a shower head against your mask. And see how much of a mist still gets out to the other side.
Or just try with a spray bottle.
Cloth is just a prison with string bars. Stuff can still get through the holes in-between.
That is why proper masks have a very specific maximum pore size.
And if you are touching that mask with your hands, especially putting it on a second time, you're only making sure to spread whatever the mask collected onto your hands and everything the mask and its inside touch.
You
Re: (Score:1)
The mask isn't to prevent you from being infected. It's to prevent you from infecting others. (Excepting very careful proper use in medical situations.) It's only helpful for people who are infected to wear masks... but we have no idea who those people are (even with unlimited testing, the false negative rate is too high for it to be used to decide someone is definitely not going to infect others), so everyone should be assuming they are infected and doing everything they can to avoid infecting others.
In fa
Re: (Score:2)
Some masks can prevent you from getting infected. It is just that the cloth ones and the surgical masks are not very good at that. They weren't designed to do that. N95, N99, and P100 masks as well as silicone respirators and PAPR hoods/helmets are much much more effective at protecting you from airborne virus droplets if they exist.
There is some debate about whether such droplets are a threat. Some people are comfortable staking their life on the limited evidence that seems to show they are not. Others are
Re: (Score:3)
If they are 20% effective at reducing spread, that still reduces a 7-day doubling rate in new cases to 9 days, or a 4 day rate to 5.
The challenge is they are a pain to use. I have a drywall mask with replaceable filters (useless in healthcare because it cannot be properly sterilized, useless to stop asymptomatic people because it has an unfiltered exhaust valve), and I can use it for about a half hour before it becomes too uncomfortable. A bandana mask doesnt last me much longer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yeah, that won't help AT ALL. (Score:5, Informative)
Their goal is not to prevent all droplets from passing through. It's to reduce their amount. Apply your own test without the pressure and see how quickly the mask gets wet. That's how much it has successfully prevented from passing through.
And like most viruses, this one propagates by depositing a sufficient viral load onto vulnerable tissues. Masks reducing these loads significantly help reduce infectivity.
Re: (Score:3)
Put your beer down and try this: pull on your full face respirator and try to touch your face. Note how your fingers will always just hit the plastic faceplate and get nowhere near your skin. There is respiratory protection that will protect you from both touching your face and from airborne droplets if they do exist.
Cloth and surgical masks are more about public health rather than individuals. If everyone wears them then coughs or sneezes or yawns are not so infectious anymore and it mitigates the amount o
It's my understanding.... (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing, though.... when you see a symptomatic person, you tend to give them wide berth, so your chance of getting infected is lower anyways.
Health care workers don't have a choice in that regard, which is why a mask will tend to make a significant difference to their chance of infection in that context.
Similarly, if you live with someone who is sick, then a mask is definitely prudent.
But this virus is not ubiquitous in the general public...not anywhere close to it, s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The reason a mask only really significantly helps health care workers comes down to simple math.
When you are within, say, arm's length of someone for an extended period, the likelihood of one of their droplets landing on you while they are coughing or sneezing is not insignificant. Likewise, the mask covering your face is taking up a moderately large percentage of possible trajectories for such droplets. At greater distances, however, while yes the mask is still taking up some of the possible traject
Re: (Score:2)
At greater distances, however, while yes the mask is still taking up some of the possible trajectories for the virus, the chance of a droplet actually landing on you in the first place is so dramatically reduced that the mask doesn't appreciably make much difference.
Yet somehow people outside healthcare do get infected by asymptomatic carriers. If it reduces the probability of infection by a factor 5 (say) for a healthcare worker, why wouldn't the same factor apply to infection of someone else?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing, though.... when you see a symptomatic person, you tend to give them wide berth, so your chance of getting infected is lower anyways.
Last estimate I've seen 50% are asymptomatic but can spread it for weeks and people who go on to develop symptoms can spread it for two days before symptom onset. Further the most common symptom (fever) you can't even see. This seems like a terribly ineffective thing to rely on for this virus. For other viruses it may well make a lot of sense.
But this virus is not ubiquitous in the general public...not anywhere close to it, so wearing a mask does not add any significant protection.
It was "ubiquitous" enough for many millions of people to catch it thus far. I don't understand what you are saying.
At the very least, the notion that it does is not supported by the science. At most it is a security blanket that might make you feel more secure, but any actual protection it offers is not supported by the data.
What science? What data? Is there a study you
Re: (Score:2)
That's true, but again, unless you are in fairly continual contact with one or more sick people, the likelihood of a droplet landing anywhere on your body let alone on your face is already extremely small.
If you are healthy, a mask is only practical at improving your chances of staying so if you work with sick people or live with someone who is
Re: (Score:2)
That's true, but again, unless you are in fairly continual contact with one or more sick people, the likelihood of a droplet landing anywhere on your body let alone on your face is already extremely small.
I don't understand... I just don't get it. Millions of people already have this virus, infections are growing exponentially and you are saying risk is extremely small... why?
Sure my personal risk right now is probably small for this and all kinds of shit yet personal risk doesn't translate into coherent policy positions applicable to entire populations.
If you are healthy, a mask is only practical at improving your chances of staying so if you work with sick people or live with someone who is sick. Otherwise, it just shows that you are letting fear overcome your ability to think rationally.
I have to ask again. What evidence? What data? What objective information can I use to make informed decisions?
Simply put, the scientific data that supports masks making any measurably lower chance of getting sick outside of close and quite regular contact situations is simply absent.
Absent because of lack of published studie
Re: (Score:2)
Absent any extended physical proximity to a sick individual, your chance of getting COVID19 from a random person is actually quite small, because the disease is droplet-based, and not airborne, because droplets do not travel very far. The most likely way to catch it from an unknown party would be to have simply touched a surface that still had the coronavirus on it left by a sick person, and then to touch your face near your eyes nose or mouth without having washed your hands the necessary length of time
Re: (Score:2)
Absent any extended physical proximity to a sick individual, your chance of getting COVID19 from a random person is actually quite small, because the disease is droplet-based, and not airborne, because droplets do not travel very far.
In general, you are otherwise most likely to only catch it from people you are personally connected to and see often, having some occasion to be in extended close proximity in the first place.
What is the risk if getting it while standing in line shopping vs. passing by someone you don't know who is infected on a cruise ship or attending a single church service with people you don't know?
Are there any useful numbers? If I stand for 5 minutes in line vs sitting in a Shincheonji church pew for an hour is my risk of getting infected 12 times less standing in line? Is it 2 times less? Is it 5 times more? I see what happened in South Korea and Diamond Princess where out of over 700 people infecte
Re: (Score:2)
Any extended close contact with an infected individual will carry some amount of risk. If you are near a lot of sick people, this can accumulate quite significantly.
Look if you are really feeling like you need to be physically near lots of people that you don't know right now, then obviously a mask will be prudent.
But the question I have to ask is why?
I mean considering how much more, in general, health care workers who *need* to be in close contact with these people require them, it seems both to
Re: (Score:2)
But the question I have to ask is why?
I mean considering how much more, in general, health care workers who *need* to be in close contact with these people require them, it seems both to be both unconscionable
Personally I have a strategic stockpile of 2 slightly sawdust stained N95 and N100 masks. Already gave unused ones I had away to someone with lung cancer.
and certainly very naive for a healthy person to be wearing a mask to avoid getting sick in public
Why is that certain? What is this based on?
when simple measures such as maintaining social distancing and practicing good hand hygiene are actually even *more* effective anyways.
The choice is not between wearing a mask _OR_ doing other things. It's wearing a mask _AND_ doing other things.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are already maintaining social distance and practicing appropriate levels of hand hygiene, then a mask isn't actually going to offer any further protection from a droplet-based illness anyways beyond possibly giving you a sense of security that isn't actually founded on any logic or rational stance.
Health care workers don't have a choice with regards to maintaining a social distance from the people they provide care for, which is why they benefit in that circumstance.
Similarly, if you live with
Re: (Score:2)
If you are already maintaining social distance and practicing appropriate levels of hand hygiene, then a mask isn't actually going to offer any further protection from a droplet-based illness anyways beyond possibly giving you a sense of security that isn't actually founded on any logic or rational stance.
What is this conclusion based upon? Guessing? Assumptions? Wishful thinking? Can you point to even a single relevant study that supports your conclusions? I'm guessing the answer is no.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By the fact that respiratory droplets don't actually tend go very far from the person who produced them in the first place because of this thing called gravity. And yes, there have been studies, not perhaps specifically for covid19 but for droplet-based illnesses in general.
Can you cite just one? I'll accept an analogue study of the efficacy of different types of masks supporting the conclusion "a mask isn't actually going to offer any further protection"
The greatest risk is from symptomatic individuals who can of course also expel them furthest, but whom you would ordinarily tend to give a wide berth.
Greatest risk does not mean exclusive risk. There is still significant risk of asymptomatic spread. It is known people can be asymptomatic yet still spread for a couple of days before onset of symptoms. There is also evidence half the people who get it never have any symptoms. This can mean a solid week of these people spr
Re: (Score:2)
Only in close proximity, or less likely but still possible, by respiratory droplets landiing on a surface that is touched by a healthy person who then happens to touch his face before washing his or her hands.
Masks don't really protect you from the latter unless you are literally wearing them 24/7. Masks do protect you somewhat from the former, but if you are practicing physical distancing already then that's not an issue.
The only other risk in the
Re: (Score:2)
At the very least, the notion that it does is not supported by the science.
This is very true. It is only common sense that supports the use of effective respiratory protection for a respiratory virus. It's just a kind of obvious logic. It is unproven however that even space suits can protect you from it. There would need to be studies and there haven't been any. The idea that even a BSL4 lab could prevent transmission is so far unproven.
At most it is a security blanket that might make you feel more secure, but any actual protection it offers is not supported by the data.
Just because it is not supported by specific data does not mean that it is ineffective. There are certainly no studies that show it to be ineffect
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that is proven more directly by the simple fact that if you are physically isolated from getting droplets on your body, and because COVID19 is droplet-based, then you cannot catch the illness.
Masks do not actually stop droplets from landing you. This is why it is unproven that they offer any significant benefit. They do not stop you from touching your face. They incidentally happen to provide some protecting for about 2/3 o
Virus accumulation should be minimal for many (Score:5, Informative)
I have a surgical mask which I keep in my car where it is exposed to sunlight. Since I began staying home I have shopped 3 times and I think the sunlight has disinfected my mask between each shopping trip. I think I will try to use InstaCart rather than shop in the future.
For most of us there is not a need to shop except maybe once or twice a week. There should be time to allow sunlight to kill the virus between trips. Also if you remove the mask (or scarf) carefully you can avoid touching the front of it. Still I think a good hand washing should be in order after any possible exposure. If you want to wash a cloth mask, go ahead. Just wash your hands after placing it in the washer. Perhaps it would be sufficient to place it in some diluted bleach to kill the virus and clean it up a bit.
I think the masks are a good idea. You could be an asymptomatic carrier and then the mask will help prevent to spread of the virus. It does require exercising caution to avoid mistakes. I always handle mine with the ear loops when I remove it and also wash my hands soon after. Then I use my diluted bleach to disinfect door knobs and anything else I may have touched. I may still catch it, but I am trying to be cautious.
Re:Virus accumulation should be minimal for many (Score:5, Informative)
The active agent in sunlight which disinfects is ultraviolet light. Most types of glass, including the glass used in car windows, will block UV light. If you want something to be disinfected by sunlight, you need to put it in direct sunlight.
Re: (Score:3)
The active agent in sunlight which disinfects is ultraviolet light. Most types of glass, including the glass used in car windows, will block UV light. If you want something to be disinfected by sunlight, you need to put it in direct sunlight.
I believe most cars have UV blocking glass in the windscreen (UV A and B), but the side windows typically only block one of them (can't remember which one). So someone who is inclined to roll the dice on sterilising their masks might have better luck putting it in the back seat!
Re: (Score:3)
Glass blocks UVB/C unless specifically formulated to block UVA or not block UV at all. This is important for your eyes as eyes are easily damaged by UVA.
However. UV-A doesn't sterilize. UV-A doesn't even cause a sunburn. Actually UV-B isn't all that good for sterilising either so simply leaving something in the sun is not what is going to kill the virus. The temperature and lack of humidity will make it hard for a virus to survive but the mask isn't being sterilised in any normal sense of the word.
Re: (Score:2)
Sunlight does not disinfect very well. There has been a rumor about UV disinfecting, but the sunlight will not do this for just a few hours in the sun. The UV that they have been using to disinfect rooms with is high power UVC rays, and UVC will give you a sunburn in seconds. From sunlight you mostly get UVA, wth some UVB. Your auto windows also probably provide some small UV protection in them anyway. So the rumors about UV being able to kill Covid-19 is both correct, but also wildly misunderstood.
Re: Virus accumulation should be minimal for many (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The way I heard it, more than a day. But I can't find that article. Here's another informative one though.
https://www.bbc.com/future/art... [bbc.com]
"And you can disinfect your make by... (Score:2)
slightly soaking it in water and then putting in the microwave for about a minute just like a sponge." - said no one ever.
CDC is full of shit, because of PPE shortage (Score:2)
It is clear that wearing masks slows the spread of the disease and also protects wearer. Any idiot understands this. So why does the CDC continue to insist that people shouldn't be wearing masks, unless already sick or caring for the sick? Clearly, they're shitting us about it because the country was utterly unprepared for this crisis, and now there aren't enough masks or other PPE even for the medical professionals.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, people seem to be forgetting that the CDC was recommending that people DO NOT wear masks just a few weeks ago, because they were ineffective:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/29... [cnn.com]
It's stories like this that make you wonder how much of the Coronavirus "news" we are getting is genuine, and how much is just propaganda.
Re: (Score:2)
What BS (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Better, I recommend we stuff a cloth in Trump's mouth and protect the entire country...MAGA.
Re: I recommend cloth in my ears ... (Score:2)
One reason the President's political rivals don't stand a snowball's chance in hell in the next election, is that they somehow think talking like a foul mouthed seventh-grader will impress others with their wit and political acumen. However it does not.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that he does not use foul language, contrary to memes here and elsewhere.
"Grab them by the pussy". Oh sorry, that was when he didn't know he was on mic (like his oh fuck a few weeks ago before his coronavirus address). When he knew he was on mic, he just talks about bullshit, kick their ass, pompous ass, so goddamn poor, shithole countries, and so much more.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/t... [google.com]
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's no protecting yourself from Trump's utterances, not when his sycophantic followers are ready to believe that ass, just see the mod downs on this thread. He even announced he's decided not to wear a face mask after telling everyone the CDC was recommending it. Personally, I think it would be an improvement on him. But I'd want it to be a reverse gas mask to suck up all his inane comments.
His alleged administration was handed a program to produce ventilators from the Obama Administration, the last com
Re: (Score:2)
He even announced he's decided not to wear a face mask after telling everyone the CDC was recommending it.
Darwin at work!
Re: (Score:2)
Paywalled
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is clearly a compulsive liar, he's been proved to lie and contradict himself a massive amount of times. It's strange times we live in that people can choose their sources such as they can live in a complete fantasy world, and then when anything contradicts the fantasy it must be fake news! Many thought the internet would be a good source for truth and it is, but many flat out won't believe the truth.