Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Science and Technology => Topic started by: Steve H on July 05, 2020, 07:49:31 AM
-
Don't jump down my throat - I'm only posting the link without comment.
https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1435/rr-40?fbclid=IwAR2Zz_t0UuLbyBVnNWDo3NPNt1wb0VC21bXCnBibB91v93FnXMl8gw0qcsY
-
I think it is safer to wear one than not, but one has to remember that it isn't likely to give one 100% protection.
-
I think it is safer to wear one than not, but one has to remember that it isn't likely to give one 100% protection.
Have you read the article? It lists several possible side effects that might make wearing a mask more dangerous than not.
As it happens, I'm pretty concerned that plenty of otherwise rational people, particularly in the USA, look on face masks as a silver bullet.
-
Thanks for posting that, Mr Micawber.
I've now got to rethink, in light of that, exactly what to do when I go shopping next week.
-
Thanks for posting that, Mr Micawber.
I've now got to rethink, in light of that, exactly what to do when I go shopping next week.
I went shopping yesterday. I didn't wear a mask, but then I'm 99.99% certain I don't have COVID19. I didn't interact with any other human beings except briefly with the person overseeing the Smart Shop tills and the person manning the till in the local shop. In the latter case, there was a massive perspex screen that would have been more effective than any face mask.
Remember that wearing a facemask is to protect other people from you. If you don't put yourself in the position of infecting somebody else, they aren't necessary. I would say wear one if you are in a position where you can't properly social distance. Most large supermarkets are not a problem in that respect: just walking past somebody without stopping to chat isn't going to infect them.
-
The benefits of wearing a mask outweigh the risks, imo. I also wear a pair of surgical gloves when shopping.
-
The benefits of wearing a mask outweigh the risks, imo. I also wear a pair of surgical gloves when shopping.
Putting 'imo' doesn't really advance the discussion though. Why is it your opinion and why do you think the arguments covered against masks are wrong?
-
I have read the article and will continue to wear my face mask, end of story.
-
I have read the article and will continue to wear my face mask, end of story.
Again, you are not making any argument. It's even less of an attempt to have a discussion than Alan Burns.
-
Again, you are not making any argument. It's even less of an attempt to have a discussion than Alan Burns.
Stuff the argument, I personally feel safer wearing a mask and that is all that matters to me. If I am wrong and screw up, on my own head be it.
-
Stuff the argument, I personally feel safer wearing a mask and that is all that matters to me. If I am wrong and screw up, on my own head be it.
Facts bad!
-
Stuff the argument, I personally feel safer wearing a mask and that is all that matters to me. If I am wrong and screw up, on my own head be it.
LR, that really isn't good enough. I wear a mask when out because the evidence I had seen thus far suggested that was the safest thing to do. Now there is some new evidence that suggests the advantages may be outweighed by previously unknown disadvantages, surely it is sensible to look again at our actions in light of the new evidence.
I may, or may not change my behaviour, but I am at least going to give it some thought.
-
I think that there is probably a net benefit to wearing masks, and have just bought some re-usable ones, but clearly it's not as simple as many people think. Interesting that the letter mentions risk-compensation, as also with bike helmets.
-
Thank-you for the article, Wilkins Micawber. These are some of the reasons why I have not worn a mask throughout this pandemic. They are as much 'common-sense' reasons as the reasons to wear a mask. One of my main concerns is the breathing-in of your exhaled co2, be it only a little but I've read reports of people experiencing headaches since having to wear a mask.
Also, I may have had a mild form of Covid-19 at the beginning of February when I had many of the systems: an incessant cough and a temperature and feeling poorly enough to take to my bed. It was very strange - I started to feel better and then went down again. All-in-all I was unwell for nearly 3 weeks.
So, this too gives me confidence that I may have some kind of immunity to the virus and should not be able to pass anything on to someone else. It would be good to be tested though for clarification.
-
LR, that really isn't good enough. I wear a mask when out because the evidence I had seen thus far suggested that was the safest thing to do. Now there is some new evidence that suggests the advantages may be outweighed by previously unknown disadvantages, surely it is sensible to look again at our actions in light of the new evidence.
I may, or may not change my behaviour, but I am at least going to give it some thought.
It’s not new and it’s not evidence. The possible objections in the letter have been known since the start of the pandemic. It’s part of the reason why the government started off by saying mask wearing was not advised.
It’s not evidence, at least the points in the linked letter are not evidence, they are hypotheses. They are possible reasons why the counter intuitive idea that mask wearing might be more dangerous than not wearing a mask might be true. I do not know what studies have been done to back up or refute the hypotheses.
-
Putting 'imo' doesn't really advance the discussion though. Why is it your opinion and why do you think the arguments covered against masks are wrong?
"Imo" is what serves in LR's case for facts and logical arguments. ::)
In any case, LR, no-one is trying to persuade you or anyone else not to wear masks. The link simply points out that it's more complicated than it seems.
-
I've tried to avoid wearing a mask as much as possible, but today had to sit for an hour with one on. I recall that as soon as the rule about masks in ships and enclosed spaces came into effect, the number of cases of coronavirus started to increase. The masks may prevent me spreading germs bit it also makes sure any germs already in us have a better opportunity to reproduce, in my opinion.
-
I've tried to avoid wearing a mask as much as possible, but today had to sit for an hour with one on. I recall that as soon as the rule about masks in ships and enclosed spaces came into effect, the number of cases of coronavirus started to increase. The masks may prevent me spreading germs bit it also makes sure any germs already in us have a better opportunity to reproduce, in my opinion.
There only appeared to be a correlation because of the lag between infection and symptoms. As to preventing germs spreading, if you think you have the infection you shouldn't be going out anyway, so no need for a mask.
-
There only appeared to be a correlation because of the lag between infection and symptoms. As to preventing germs spreading, if you think you have the infection you shouldn't be going out anyway, so no need for a mask.
We're infectious before symptoms start, so people will go out not knowing they have the virus, and infect others if they don't socially distance. I checked the dates - masks were enforced from 24 July. At that time cases were hovering around 700 per day. On 9 August the case number went above 1,000, so two weeks after masks enforced. I'm not saying there is definitely a link, but the stats look to me as though they would support a link.
-
We're infectious before symptoms start, so people will go out not knowing they have the virus, and infect others if they don't socially distance. I checked the dates - masks were enforced from 24 July. At that time cases were hovering around 700 per day. On 9 August the case number went above 1,000, so two weeks after masks enforced. I'm not saying there is definitely a link, but the stats look to me as though they would support a link.
They don't.
-
We're infectious before symptoms start, so people will go out not knowing they have the virus, and infect others if they don't socially distance. I checked the dates - masks were enforced from 24 July. At that time cases were hovering around 700 per day. On 9 August the case number went above 1,000, so two weeks after masks enforced. I'm not saying there is definitely a link, but the stats look to me as though they would support a link.
Correlation is not causation.
It's much more likely to be the relaxed social distancing rules that is causing the current increase in infections.
-
Correlation is not causation.
It's much more likely to be the relaxed social distancing rules that is causing the current increase in infections.
The face masks may not be causing infections but they don't seem to be preventing them either.
-
The face masks may not be causing infections but they don't seem to be preventing them either.
I have yet to see any figures published that show how many cases diagnosed relate to mask-wearers and how many to those disregarding the rules on wearing masks.
To me, logically, until this is done neither argument, either for or against. would seem to be in any way valid!
-
I have yet to see any figures published that show how many cases diagnosed relate to mask-wearers and how many to those disregarding the rules on wearing masks.
To me, logically, until this is done neither argument, either for or against. would seem to be in any way valid!
Unfortunately, given what the masks are for, that's not going to be a useful measurement - you wearing the mask isn't intended to stop you catching the virus, so to equate mask-wearing individuals with individuals infected says nothing about the effectiveness as a preventive measure.
What might be a useful measure to some extent is an assessment of what proportion of an area's population are regularly wearing masks in public places plotted against the infection rate in that area, but it would be very difficult to account for the innumerable social and cultural variations between such areas.
O.
-
Unfortunately, given what the masks are for, that's not going to be a useful measurement - you wearing the mask isn't intended to stop you catching the virus, so to equate mask-wearing individuals with individuals infected says nothing about the effectiveness as a preventive measure.
What might be a useful measure to some extent is an assessment of what proportion of an area's population are regularly wearing masks in public places plotted against the infection rate in that area, but it would be very difficult to account for the innumerable social and cultural variations between such areas.
O.
If a mask protects other people from my germs, I fail to see how it can fail to protect me from other people's germs. If it forms an effective barrier in one direction, why doesn't it in the other direction?
-
If a mask protects other people from my germs, I fail to see how it can fail to protect me from other people's germs. If it forms an effective barrier in one direction, why doesn't it in the other direction?
Because when you breathe out, the droplets containing the virus are either captured by the mask which they hit straight away or redirected upwards where they condense on your specs (at least that is how it seems to me).
When you breathe in, the air tens to come in round the sides of the mask not through it.
-
Because when you breathe out, the droplets containing the virus are either captured by the mask which they hit straight away or redirected upwards where they condense on your specs (at least that is how it seems to me).
When you breathe in, the air tens to come in round the sides of the mask not through it.
Why doesn't my breath go out round the sides? I remain unconvinced. They are not 100% effective, but they must logically provide some protection both to others and to the wearer.
-
If a mask protects other people from my germs, I fail to see how it can fail to protect me from other people's germs. If it forms an effective barrier in one direction, why doesn't it in the other direction?
https://www.truthorfiction.com/wear-your-mask-the-urine-test-analogy-meme/
"A meme likening the purpose of coronavirus masks to protecting from a random wild urinaters accurately describes the purpose of coronavirus mask recommendations."
-
Thanks for posting that Udayana, the very same meme came to my head whilst reading this thread. ;D
-
Thanks for posting that Udayana, the very same meme came to my head whilst reading this thread. ;D
An analogy the truth of which even the thickest, even the freakin' Yanks, cannot fail to see!
-
If a mask protects other people from my germs, I fail to see how it can fail to protect me from other people's germs. If it forms an effective barrier in one direction, why doesn't it in the other direction?
Exactly.
-
Exactly.
I'm sure there's no 100% answer to this blasted virus but I'll go with anything that even slightly improves our chances of surviving and I'll go with Blokey Mc B on this one too.
ippy.
-
An analogy the truth of which even the thickest, even the freakin' Yanks, cannot fail to see!
It might interest you to know that the UK and the USA are recorded as being at the same level of compliance for wearing masks in public - around 75%. So your depiction of Americans as being thick on that basis is incorrect, although viewing the evening news I can see how you might conclude that they don't comply. That, I suspect, is a fault of news organisations and their agendas rather than the fault of the people of the USA.
Incidentally, Germany usually held up as an exemplar in Covid matters only achieves 65%. Still those freakin' Krauts, eh?
Figures available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_masks_during_the_COVID-19_pandemic
-
If a mask protects other people from my germs, I fail to see how it can fail to protect me from other people's germs. If it forms an effective barrier in one direction, why doesn't it in the other direction?
It theoretically reduces the range of dispersal - once someone else's germs are at the front of your mask, anything you breathe in is only going to one place, but when you breathe out the mask disrupts the air flow, and limits how far your germs spread.
It's a minor effect - there is some degree of capture within the fabic, but not much - but over a large population that minor effect adds up to significant gains in absolute terms, but only a small 'percentage' difference.
O.
-
Because when you breathe out, the droplets containing the virus are either captured by the mask which they hit straight away or redirected upwards where they condense on your specs (at least that is how it seems to me).
When you breathe in, the air tens to come in round the sides of the mask not through it.
I noticed today, wearing a cloth mask, that when I breathed in, the material moved inwards towards my mouth and nose, s obviously most of the air is going through the mask.
-
I noticed today, wearing a cloth mask, that when I breathed in, the material moved inwards towards my mouth and nose, s obviously most of the air is going through the mask.
Yes, of-course - along with any covid-19 viruses not in droplets large enough to be captured by a mask, fall to the ground, or blown away out of your immediate area. It all depends on the size of the droplets and how long small droplets can linger - the protection is not absolute but probabilistic.
-
Yes, of-course - along with any covid-19 viruses not in droplets large enough to be captured by a mask, fall to the ground, or blown away out of your immediate area. It all depends on the size of the droplets and how long small droplets can linger - the protection is not absolute but probabilistic.
I know they're not 100% effective, but if they are effective at all, they must be so in both directions.
-
I know they're not 100% effective, but if they are effective at all, they must be so in both directions.
Technically, yes, but to vastly differing degrees. Part of the effect 'outbound' is the fact that the droplets are dispersed more - passing through the cloth causes turbulence which both widens and shortens the dispersal pattern. BY contrast, on the in-breath, your physique tends to channel everything one way, and although the mask will capture a few tiny element most will still pass through, and if everyone else is wearing masks then the majority of particles too big to pass through your mask have already been caught on theirs.
O.
-
Technically, yes, but to vastly differing degrees. Part of the effect 'outbound' is the fact that the droplets are dispersed more - passing through the cloth causes turbulence which both widens and shortens the dispersal pattern. BY contrast, on the in-breath, your physique tends to channel everything one way, and although the mask will capture a few tiny element most will still pass through, and if everyone else is wearing masks then the majority of particles too big to pass through your mask have already been caught on theirs.
O.
Thank you - a sensible explanation, at last, of why they are much more effective at protecting others than the wearer! That's all I wanted, because, while it's easy to understand when explained, it isn't obvious.
-
I noticed today, wearing a cloth mask, that when I breathed in, the material moved inwards towards my mouth and nose, s obviously most of the air is going through the mask.
No. Obviously it is not.
The moving in is caused by a difference in pressure between the two sides. i.e. the air molecules are hitting the mask and bouncing off, not going straight through.
If the mask was made of fishnet would it move in as much as if it were made of polythene?
-
Technically, yes, but to vastly differing degrees. Part of the effect 'outbound' is the fact that the droplets are dispersed more - passing through the cloth causes turbulence which both widens and shortens the dispersal pattern. BY contrast, on the in-breath, your physique tends to channel everything one way, and although the mask will capture a few tiny element most will still pass through, and if everyone else is wearing masks then the majority of particles too big to pass through your mask have already been caught on theirs.
O.
May I also thank you for that helpful and lucid explanation.
-
Here is a Slow Mo Guys video about wearing masks. I think it shuts down the argument against mask wearing completely.
https://youtu.be/gZ66wJFD3bs
Also there’s an interview with a special guest.
-
Here is a Slow Mo Guys video about wearing masks. I think it shuts down the argument against masks wearing completely.
https://youtu.be/gZ66wJFD3bs
Also, there’s an interview with a special guest.
If you do not wear a mask, watch this video; if you do wear one, tell everyone you know who doesn't to watch it!
-
Thank you - a sensible explanation, at last, of why they are much more effective at protecting others than the wearer! That's all I wanted, because, while it's easy to understand when explained, it isn't obvious.
You want obvious? Watch the video in #41!
-
You want obvious? Watch the video in #41!
I'd like to, but it isn't working on my laptop.
-
I'd like to, but it isn't working on my laptop.
How much more convenient could that be?!
-
How much more convenient could that be?!
What is that supposed to mean?
-
What is that supposed to mean?
It means it's just a standard youtube video and it's highly unlikely that a random laptop will be unable to play it.
-
It means it's just a standard youtube video and it's highly unlikely that a random laptop will be unable to play it.
Why would that be 'convenient'?
-
Why would that be 'convenient'?
Owlswing is insinuating that Beyoncé Castle is lying about being able to watch the video so he can continue to deny that masks are effective.
-
Owlswing is insinuating that Beyoncé Castle is lying about being able to watch the video so he can continue to deny that masks are effective.
Which your explanation missed
-
It means it's just a standard youtube video and it's highly unlikely that a random laptop will be unable to play it.
Well, I assure you it didn't play on mine. I'll try again now.
-
Owlswing is insinuating that Beyoncé Castle is lying about being able to watch the video so he can continue to deny that masks are effective.
I don't deny and never have denied the effectiveness of masks, as anyone who's been paying attention would be aware. The title of this thread was me playing devil's advocate, as the OP made clear/
-
The video is now playing ok, and I've watched the relevant bit - and I am thoroughly in favour of mask-wearing, and wear one in enclosed public places, as you'd know if you'd actually read my posts before making your snide comment. I posted a BMJ article in the OP for interest, without, as I said, comment.
-
The video is now playing ok, and I've watched the relevant bit - and I am thoroughly in favour of mask-wearing, and wear one in enclosed public places, as you'd know if you'd actually read my posts before making your snide comment. I posted a BMJ article in the OP for interest, without, as I said, comment.
If I have offended I offer my sincere apologies!
I am afraid that having an ex-wife and her sister, who are both nurses who have, at the last count, been isolated three times as a precaution having come into contact with confirmed cases, I find that the number of those refusing to wear a mask, in a count which was taken in Bath last weekend, a ratio of one mask wearer to thirty-seven non-wearers and on the previous weekend in Hounslow the ratio was one wearer to sixty-three non-wearers, makes me wonder if it is not the case that some are actually trying to commit suicide in a way which will pay off on their insurance and to Hell with anyone else!
Anyone? Everyone!
Again my apologies for any unintentional offence!
-
Other options: eat baked beans and create an aroma so people will naturally keep their distance.
Or don't brush your teeth and have bad breath. Or do brush your teeth so that the spray is virus-free.
-
The death rate is lower now than during the first spike; maybe one reason for this is that hospitalised infected people didn't have such a big dose of virus due to mask wearing rules.
-
Other options: eat baked beans and create an aroma so people will naturally keep their distance.
Or don't brush your teeth and have bad breath. Or do brush your teeth so that the spray is virus-free.
Before covid, I used to cough to hide a fart...now I fart to hide a cough!