re: Study: most masks only 10% effective at stopping covid indoors

quote:

---

How much do the n95 protect against ? It’s in the name.

---

Of course you have to wear them properly, which most don't. And the number of ways of improper usage are many and most who wear them violate many of those. And most won't wash their hands every time they touch them, which compromises, and most who wear them likely don't wash them enough and that further compromises.

And finally, you have to wear them and I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the percentage of folks out there wearing an n95, but I don't see too many of the mask wearing public wearing them, the totally useless variety of cloth masks are much more prevalent.

First, this study means absolutely nothing in terms of what we innately want to infer from it.

Second, the actual release from the school said this:

quote:

---

“There is no question it is beneficial to wear any face covering, both for protection in close proximity and at a distance in a room,”

---

link in the original article

But even that statement takes a logical leap.

Third, there are issues (even done my a fluid dynamics lab) with the use of a human analog instead of a test group of people.

Fourth, the study only looked at exhalation and not inhalation and there are various reasons why the numbers would not be the same.

Fifth, we would need to know how the virus particle populates different sized aerosolized liquids, it may be proportional to surface area, it may have an inverse relationship etc.

Now, lets throw all that and any other confounding issues and make a lot of logical leaps but first a logical leap that seems logical but it isn't.

It is an innate inference that the N95 mask prevents 50% of exposures that would produce infections. Just looking at the anecdotal evidence of COVID unit nurses that is likely VERY low. COVID nurses were exposed to patients with high viral loads many times a day on every shift and it took lots of exposures before the average nurse got COVID and some never did even all the way through being vaccinated. Just a couple of confounding issues there are they did wear more PPE than just the mask and they were exposed to low levels of inoculum regularly so they may have supercharged their innate immunity or even built up specific immunity in their adaptive immune system. But I think it is a safe leap to say that 50% is not directly applicable to per exposure and it may or may not be directly proportional.

So now we have dispensed with all those confounding issues consider these two hyperbolic examples:

1

The mean number of virus particles in an average exposure is 100

The mean number of virus particles needing to reach the mucosal membranes to cause an infection is 99 with a standard deviation of 3

The mask stops 10% of the virus particles on average

This means the mask is roughly 99.7% effective per exposure

(I know this isn't perfect by a long shot but this is dirty stats)

2

The mean number of virus particles in an average exposure is 100

The mean number of virus particles needing to reach the mucosal membranes to cause infection is 10 with a standard deviation of 3

The mask stops 10% of the particles on average

In this case, the mask is practically 0% effective


By itself, the results of the study even without the confounding issues can not be applied to their effectiveness for preventing COVID infections without the kind of data that is from a practical POV impossible to obtain. It could be gathered but observational study but those are really only useful as a follow-up study.

Most of the people on each side of the masking issue will see the results as a positive. The masks are useless crowd will say this is proof the "blue" masks are essentially useless. The pro-mask side will say it is better than nothing and can't hurt which is similar to the ivermectin/HCQ argument. The pro-mask crowd might start pushing for N95 masks vs just any face covering. Either side could be right even if the percentages were accurate based on a lot of other factors.

Nothing really to see here unless one practices some apophenia.

quote:

---

Most of the people on each side of the masking issue will see the results as a positive. The masks are useless crowd will say this is proof the "blue" masks are essentially useless. The pro-mask side will say it is better than nothing and can't hurt which is similar to the ivermectin/HCQ argument. The pro-mask crowd might start pushing for N95 masks vs just any face covering. Either side could be right even if the percentages were accurate based on a lot of other factors. Nothing really to see here unless one practices some apophenia.

---

You are correct Obtuse - at this point minds are made up.

I am one of the masks are useless folks and at this point my mind is 100% made up. For me life isn't lived in a vacuum or a controlled lab environment where protocol and procedure are followed anywhere close to what it needs to be to work they way it however noble, is intended to work.

We live out in the real world where probably less than 10% of those who even wear masks wear n95 and even those, constantly touch their masks with their hands, remove them to speak at times, remove them to eat or drink in proximity to others, don't wash their hands each time they touch their mask and on and on I could list countless ways even those who wear even the proper type of mask compromise it early and often.

And in this reality the effectiveness of even the proper mask is neutered.

So what do you do? Shut all and everything down so that the vast majority of the country who can't or won't or just don't know any better can't do anything to compromise this?

Absolutely impossible and not anything I or most anyone else wants.

Dude sucks so bad.
Worst poster by far when it come to this fear mongering covid.
Kid should just stay home.

quote:

---

The ONLY masks that are genuinely effective against COVID are N95/KN95.

---

An N99 or N100 would give at least equal protection. The negative is they have exhalation valves and thus slightly more expensive and they only provide protection to the wearer since the effluent is not filtered. Not a good choice for a medical environment but may be a better choice for a pregnant woman or immunocompromised person and they have the benefit of being more comfortable to breathe through.

There is some speculation in the filtration community that the P prefix masks may have some extra effectiveness at block the virus particles. The P prefix is for oil. Since small oil and fat-based particles are particularly slippery it may help trap the virus due to the lipid covering.

quote:

---

So wear the mask that works. How hard is that?

---

You should mass produce and give them out for free. Or are you just some full of shite liberal?

Why do people keep saying this? I’m in blue-as-frick Denver and they only say we recommend masks if you haven’t been vaccinated. I haven’t worn one since I flew on Memorial Day weekend.

ETA: There are mask requirements at the schools, but when I pick up from daycare, we're not required (or at least I just don't. I didn't get the poke for nothing)

quote:

---

Why do people keep saying this? I’m in blue-as-frick Denver and they only say we recommend masks if you haven’t been vaccinated. I haven’t worn one since I flew on Memorial Day weekend.

---

I don’t understand why or how you haven’t seen the push, can’t explain that. but i’m in red-AF area North of Houston and a lot of the major corporations and school districts in the area are now reimposing mask mandates for the vaccinated.

quote:

---

Lowering the speed limit on interstates to 55 would lower crash fatalities by 10%. Let's do it.

---

quote:

---

Wouldn’t be surprised to see a libtard wearing 10 masks after reading this

---

..in his car alone.