Wot no mask?

Ralph-YK

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
And here is the confusion again... repeatedly we are told that the masks confer benefit by reducing SPREAD from an infected person, but here is the WHO saying that it protects the wearer - which many experts I’ve seen commenting say it doesn’t (at least certainly not the surgical and home made types that are being commonly worn) - because they dont stop sufficient airflow and leak around the edges... and because once contaminated they can pass the infection if the wearer adjusts or touches them (which people can’t help themselves doing).

No wonder I am confused!
Months ago, on the radio, they said masks don't protect the wearer. They protect people the wearer meets. I don't know if there's been updated advice, or if it depends on the mask.
What I considered was that you might catch it if it gets on your hands, or other areas of your face, other than nose and mouth. Such as around the eyes.
I don't know the details of how the infection works for C19. Other than getting the impression it's breathed out by an infeccted person.
 

Becka

Well-Known Member
I think I needed a better understanding of what was meant by ‘medical’ masks (vs ‘surgical‘ masks)
From the same WHO document as above:

Definitions

Medical masks are defined as surgical or procedure masks that are flat or pleated; they are affixed to the head with straps that go around the ears or head or both. Their performance characteristics are tested according to a set of standardized test methods (ASTM F2100, EN 14683, or equivalent) that aim to balance high filtration, adequate breathability and optionally, fluid penetration resistance
Medical mask

Medical masks should be certified according to international or national standards to ensure they offer predictable product performance when used by health workers, according to the risk and type of procedure performed in a health care setting. Designed for single use, a medical mask’s initial filtration (at least 95% droplet filtration), breathability and, if required, fluid resistance are attributed to the type (e.g. spunbond or meltblown) and layers of manufactured non-woven materials (e.g. polypropylene, polyethylene or cellulose). Medical masks are rectangular in shape and comprise three or four layers. Each layer consists of fine to very fine fibres. These masks are tested for their ability to block droplets (3 micrometres in size; EN 14683 and ASTM F2100 standards) and particles (0.1 micrometre in size; ASTM F2100 standard only). The masks must block droplets and particles while at the same time they must also be breathable by allowing air to pass. Medical masks are regulated medical devices and categorized as PPE.

The use of medical masks in the community may divert this critical resource from the health workers and others who need them the most. In settings where medical masks are in short supply, medical masks should be reserved for health workers and at-risk individuals when indicated.

Non-medical mask

Non-medical (also referred to as “fabric” in this document) masks are made from a variety of woven and non-woven fabrics, such as polypropylene. Non-medical masks may be made of different combinations of fabrics, layering sequences and available in diverse shapes. Few of these combinations have been systematically evaluated and there is no single design, choice of material, layering or shape among the nonmedical masks that are available. The unlimited combination of fabrics and materials results in variable filtration and breathability.

A non-medical mask is neither a medical device nor personal protective equipment. However, a non-medical mask standard has been developed by the French Standardization Association (AFNOR Group) to define minimum performance in terms of filtration (minimum 70% solid particle filtration or droplet filtration) and breathability (maximum pressure difference of 0.6 mbar/cm 2 or maximum inhalation resistance of 2.4 mbar and maximum exhalation resistance of 3 mbar).(71)

The lower filtration and breathability standardized requirements, and overall expected performance, indicate that the use of non-medical masks, made of woven fabrics such as cloth, and/or non-woven fabrics, should only be considered for source control (used by infected persons) in community settings and not for prevention. They can be used ad-hoc for specific activities (e.g., while on public transport when physical distancing cannot be maintained), and their use should always be accompanied by frequent hand hygiene and physical distancing.
Those standards referenced are for products which protect the wearer from airborne particles. Also note that when they refer to itms used for source control they mean worn to control the source (wearer) from spreading the virus. Prevention means for the prevention of the wearer being infected.

 

Maz2

Well-Known Member
Don't wear one. I feel I cannot breathe in face coverings. Shops I go to operate social distancing. I also use social distancing everywhere apart from standing next to someone to pick up an item. I also walk past people as there is no risk there. There is no actual evidence that it will stop you catching it. I am avoiding public transport since they brought in the face coverings rule as I don't want to wear one.

My husband's cousin lives in South Africa and it has been mandatory there to wear them for weeks. They are still running at 5 to 6,000 cases a day.
 

Becka

Well-Known Member
What I considered was that you might catch it if it gets on your hands, or other areas of your face, other than nose and mouth. Such as around the eyes.
I don't know the details of how the infection works for C19. Other than getting the impression it's breathed out by an infeccted person.
You get infected via the respiratory system, so mainly the nose, mouth, and to a lesser extent the eyes. Which is why you should regularly wash your hands, because of the risk of transferring the virus it to your face should they become contaminated.

But for reasons I do not understand, the original government advice of avoiding touching your face seems to have just disappeared, even though the method of transmission has not changed. And this instruction still forms the guidance in other countries and is still one of the main WHO advice.

It is also important to understand that the greater you distance from others the lower the risk. But whilst two metres provides a very good balance between the risk and ability to function, virons can travel almost 30 feet. They can stay airborne long enough for you to you to step into the place of the person you stayed two metres behind.

A reduced risk is not the absence of risk. Even by social distancing at two metres, let alone one metre, using a hand gel every few minutes, and never touching your face in public anyway, you are still at of risk being infected. More so if someone you are distanced from are not wearing face coverings.

And you are at risk of being that someone if you do get infected and do not cover your face either. Because you become infectious before you experiences symptoms. By the time you need to isolate to protect others it will already be too late.

One of the arguments against masks has been that they would give a false sense of security, that people would think they are protected so can ignore all the others rules necessary to reduce transmission. Unfortunately the same false sense of security applies to all of the measures too, be that hand washing or social distancing. Each measure reduces risk further, they are not alternatives to each other.

And no matter what you do, you ultimately are left hoping other people respect your distancing. You have to hope they do not infringe your one or two metres. Hope they are not infected. Hope they are wearing a mask. Because there is nothing you can do to stop someone walking by you and coughing. The various rules are only truly effective when everyone obeys them to put the protection of others first.
 

everydayupsanddowns

Administrator
Staff member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
Alas I think that refers to exactly the sort of relatively loose-fitting masks that I was under the impression did not provide much protection to the wearer ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surgical_mask )

I thought it was going to be PP3(?) masks that they defined as ‘medical’.

The virologists interviewed on TV (and medics I know) have been consistently pointing out that the wearer doesnt get much if any protection from that pleated-style mask- which was what co fused me about the WHO quote.

Never mind, thanks for trying to clear it up. :)
 

grovesy

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
Alas I think that refers to exactly the sort of relatively loose-fitting masks that I was under the impression did not provide much protection to the wearer ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surgical_mask )

I thought it was going to be PP3(?) masks that they defined as ‘medical’.

The virologists interviewed on TV (and medics I know) have been consistently pointing out that the wearer doesnt get much if any protection from that pleated-style mask- which was what co fused me about the WHO quote.

Never mind, thanks for trying to clear it up. :)
I think some recent studies are showing any face coverings or masks, are helpful.
 

MikeTurin

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
FFP3 mask were normally used when spray painting or similar things, when some nasty chemicals are nebulised. Medical grade in the pre-covid era was to indicated that the mask was extra certified to use in a medical setup.
After the shortage of face mask in previous times, some supermarket are selling them in special offer. Also bleach, lysol and off brand hand sanitizer. The only thing in short supply is cleaning alcohol. The one for food use is plenty.

I have a decent supply of single use masks, some hand made and a couple of reusable ones.


About the importance of masks what was missing was a clear and precise set of guidelines. Personally I try to follow the guidelines here. Use it in shops and closed areas, or in crowded places.
About the effectiveness my understanding is that helps a bit and if one follows other guidelines, like washing hands often, don't cough in face of others and so on it's useful.

Only alone, doesn't work.

Besides in summer it's natural that the cases are going down, like what happens with the common cold. I'll start to use the mask more and be more careful in September.
 

grovesy

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
Dr. Brix one of the US experts, was one TV yesterday saying please wear face masks as we now have evidence that they help protect other and some degree to you.
 

Eddy Edson

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
Dr. Brix one of the US experts, was one TV yesterday saying please wear face masks as we now have evidence that they help protect other and some degree to you.
I haven't heard a single non-lame argument against wearing masks where there is a lot of community spread.

The lamest one IMO is "because it will make people feel invulnerable and neglect social distancing".

I guess the same way that seat-belts encourage people to drive dangerously, right?

Seriously, wearing masks seems to me a pretty good way of constantly reminding people that there's a pandemic.
 

Bruce Stephens

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
The lamest one IMO is "because it will make people feel invulnerable and neglect social distancing".

I guess the same way that seat-belts encourage people to drive dangerously, right?
I don't think either of those are silly ideas. I seem to remember there being some evidence that some safety features of cars (ABS, maybe?) does lead to different (slightly more risky) driving patterns.

However, I think there's been analysis of face mask wearing and the effect is (if anything) the opposite: it reminds people of the need to be careful.
 

Eddy Edson

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
I don't think either of those are silly ideas. I seem to remember there being some evidence that some safety features of cars (ABS, maybe?) does lead to different (slightly more risky) driving patterns.

However, I think there's been analysis of face mask wearing and the effect is (if anything) the opposite: it reminds people of the need to be careful.
A zillion years ago I did some data work for the road safety authority here and the message from experts was pretty clear: requiring people to strap in reminded them that they were operating potentially dangerous heavy machinery. The analogy with mask-wearing is pretty straightforward.
 

KARNAK

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
Not true Bruce, vehicles are far more safer than they ever have been, except for hand built versions.

How many times I have been out to an RTC (road traffic collision) with the police and
all the emergency services to recover a person or four that`s gone through windscreens
and part of their body is stuck to the floor pan melted by the exhaust and the heat of the engine.
If I had a hundred hands to count your fingers on, it wouldn`t be enough.

The introduction of Servo & Disc Brakes and PAS (power assisted steering) was a great safety movement in the Automotive Industry and so it still expands. Vehicles will still become casualties as sadly people will too but people are the main problem, parts go wrong which is why my lift doesn`t work at the moment. Better stop I`m on one at the moment, no animosity intended or meant, stay safe.
 

KARNAK

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
Hello Eddy how you getting on mate?
Gudday.
 
Top