Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I tend to agree in some cases, but in this case, the government's in the wrong. Cloth and paper masks do not prevent transmission of anything, particularly not aerosolized virus, at least not to the degree required to make any material impact. I'm not convinced anything short of an N95 or equivalent makes any material impact, despite the pontifications of Anthony Fauci and Rochelle Walensky, whom I no longer take seriously.
Either:
1. Virus spread on board commercial aircraft is a legitimate threat, in which case N95s/equivalents are required because nothing else will do,
2. Virus spread on board commercial aircraft is not a legitimate threat, in which case masking is irrelevant and the air filtration systems on aircraft are sufficient.
CDC/FAA needs to pick a narrative and stick with it. The virus can't be a legitimate threat but at the same time cloth masks, which aerosols are known to go right through or around, rendering the mandate ineffective.
The fact that we're arguing about this tells me that the government never presented a compelling case that proves beyond any reasonable doubt why these measures are necessary - this is a failure on the part of government/leadership. And heads need to roll.
That's not true. Why do you think doctors wear cloth masks in surgery? Please try and educate yourself and listen to your doctors instead of Fox News.
Oh, by the way, Fox requires all their employees to be vaccinated and wear masks. Even Tucker puts one on before he can walk through the building.
There has been some controversy over the effectiveness of masks. Well, my take on it is this; ever had someone sneeze and you feel the droplets landing on your face? That's not water droplets. Coughing too. One could go so far as people spitting while talking. Ever felt the droplets on your face? You don't get that when they are wearing a mask.
Besides that, while I appreciate that some folks wish to maintain their freedom and hate masks, but seriously, there are way more serious freedom infringements to fight against.
I live in an area with cold winters where one sees their own breath and that of others when outside. That ‘s condensation of respiratory droplets. Just for kicks last winter I wore a mask outside while hiking.
Guess what? I could not see my breath. On one long hike the mask became saturated, no different than the mufflers children wear. I switched to a new mask.
Cloth masks tend to protect others from the wearer’s respiratory droplets. Surgical masks rend to protect the wearer and others. I prefer to just keep distance and avoid the whole thing.
Surgeons dont wear masks to protect against virus transmission, but against larger bacteria. There are studies that show masks are even ineffective for that purpose.
Yes, no one (I think) disputes the fact that masks prevent infection when the virus is caused by droplets. The controversy, I thin, comes from the fact that COVID is an "aerosol" virus, meaning that the virus particles are microscopic (or almost microscopic). Please correct me if I am wrong.
There should be no controversy among people who understand the basic science.
First, the COVID-19 particles are very, very small. Way smaller than the weave of a cloth mask. A virus particle, by itself, is certainly capable of passing through a typical cloth mask.
HOWEVER, and this is really, really important, virus particles do not travel by themselves. The travel in solution, which means that many virus particles are suspended in a droplet of water. This may be saliva, mucus membrane fluid, or just the vapor in your breath that fogs a mirror. That is the liquid that is aerosolized, and that liquid is much bigger than the weave of a cloth mask.
So what really happens is that your cloth mask catches the vapor particles which contain viral particles and prevent them from traveling. So, masks keep people safe.
Try an experiment at home. Take a container of hairspray, and spray it on a mirror. You are going to see a scum of aerosolized particles. Now, take that same container, and from the same distances, spray it through a cloth mask and onto a mirror. What you will find is a damp mask that caught the vast majority of the hairspray, and a mirror with very little residue. While the individual chemicals that are in hairspray are about the size of viral particals, it takes a solution of water and propellant to get them anywhere. The mask stops that from happening.
Yes, a very, very small number of covid viral particles may make it through a mask. But because it takes a number of particles to cause an infection, the mask prevents that number of particles from building up.
Please try and educate yourself and listen to your doctors instead of Fox News.
How big are the gaps between fibers in a paper/cloth mask? How big are the aerosols that COVID virus lives on? It's simple math. You expect masks that can let enough CO2 through to fog up my glasses to have any material impact on aerosols that have even smaller particles? Lol. Might as well try to stop rain with one of those mesh bags your avocados come in.
Also for the record, I haven't watched Fox anything in at least a decade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spot
Oh, by the way, Fox requires all their employees to be vaccinated and wear masks. Even Tucker puts one on before he can walk through the building.
This is relevant to COVID transmission risk on commercial aircraft because? Last I checked, Tucker Carlson was not a member of airline crew and Fox wasn't an airline. Also, generally accepted junk science is still junk science
My point was trying to make you realize how stupid you sound. I'm guessing if you dont support mandatory use of seatbelts either, I guess you are just one of those types where nobody will ever get through to you.
If this was a material risk, insurers would have figured out how to adjust your premiums on this basis already, considering most cars have seatbelt sensors, just like those driving habit tracking app thingies. I NEVER said seatbelts were useless, only that I don't support mandating its use. It is possible to know that something is useful but not support mandating its use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thedude404
EDIT: Also, my point was just because something isnt 100% foolproof in preventing something, doesnt mean it's useless. I would think that would be obvious but I guess not.
So tell me, why is it my job to prevent someone else from getting the virus? Putting the efficacy of masks aside, no one has presented a compelling case as to why it's more effective to rely on others for protection from the virus than to rely on oneself. Put on a properly fitted N95 with a one-way valve. This all but guarantees yourself material and pretty robust protection from inbound transmission of the virus. This sounds a hell of a lot more reliable at protecting yourself than forcing cooperation from everyone else around you I take action to look after me, myself, and I first, and I do not apologize for it. I don't care if that offends some people. If my actions happen to benefit other people, that's secondary.
As for everyone else on the aircraft, what do you care? They either consider covid to be an acceptable risk and assume the risk or they take whatever protective measures they feel are appropriate. Either way, I have yet to be presented with a compelling case for a mandate. Coercion causes a lot of friction in a country founded on telling the King of England to go **** himself and a fundamental distrust of government.
And frankly, I don't trust any policy coming from the same bunch that watched the embassy in Kabul fall to the Taliban the way it did, or couldn't keep people calm enough to keep toilet paper stocked on store shelves, or told boldfaced lies about the efficacy of masks the first time around.
Last edited by albert648; 08-22-2021 at 09:25 PM..
Surgeons dont wear masks to protect against virus transmission, but against larger bacteria. There are studies that show masks are even ineffective for that purpose.
No. That's not true. Masks serve to prevent both bacteria and viral transmission. There are no credible studies that show masks don't prevent disease transmission in surgery. In fact, quite the opposite.
Viruses attach themselves to droplets. Masks prevent those droplets from spreading. They don't prevent all of the virus, but they slow it down significantly. And every little bit helps.
You would know that if you took the time to educate yourself on the matter instead of listening to kooks in right-wing talk radio and Fox News.
But hey man, whatever floats your boat. You can live in an alternative reality if you like.
Well I am not using any of those anyway and never do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Might as well try to stop rain with one of those mesh bags your avocados come in.
