Some masks better than others

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,701
6,779
113
You're out of ammo, bro. Its clear for everyone to see.
N95 masks are superior to surgical masks. You lost this debate.

Read and learn something: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/pdfs/UnderstandDifferenceInfographic-508.pdf

Did you read it? It says 95% of particles, not 100% protection. Testing that has been posted many times shows surgical masks aren't far behind. Now if I was in an environment like a covid ward dense with viral agents, I would be wearing an N95, a face shield, and full gowns, cap, gloves, and shoe coverings but the risk from a quick trip to the grocery store is not that. The particle density will be much, much lower and therefore the level of protection recommended is less. Similarly if I was working in a lab with serious viral agents I'd want a sealed suit with self-enclosed breathing. if I was working in a small, poorly ventilated space with many people, I would also consider an N95.

You started this whole line with your claims that masks don't work but here's my attempt at common ground.

All masks cause a decrease in transmission of respiratory droplets and N95 masks provide better protection than most other masks when worn properly. Do you still want to disagree with that?

The question of what level of masking is required in the general public is much tougher and I would expect you to admit you are simply guessing like most other people. Studies that are done say that any masking helps but it still leaves open to interpretation where to create that balance between public health and all other factors. We can solve the crisis pretty quickly if everyone was forced to stay where they are with the penalty being death if seen out but obviously that's not a reasonable compromise..
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113
Did you read it? It says 95% of particles, not 100% protection. Testing that has been posted many times shows surgical masks aren't far behind. Now if I was in an environment like a covid ward dense with viral agents, I would be wearing an N95, a face shield, and full gowns, cap, gloves, and shoe coverings but the risk from a quick trip to the grocery store is not that. The particle density will be much, much lower and therefore the level of protection recommended is less. Similarly if I was working in a lab with serious viral agents I'd want a sealed suit with self-enclosed breathing. if I was working in a small, poorly ventilated space with many people, I would also consider an N95.

You started this whole line with your claims that masks don't work but here's my attempt at common ground.

All masks cause a decrease in transmission of respiratory droplets and N95 masks provide better protection than most other masks when worn properly. Do you still want to disagree with that?

The question of what level of masking is required in the general public is much tougher and I would expect you to admit you are simply guessing like most other people. Studies that are done say that any masking helps but it still leaves open to interpretation where to create that balance between public health and all other factors. We can solve the crisis pretty quickly if everyone was forced to stay where they are with the penalty being death if seen out but obviously that's not a reasonable compromise..
Surgical masks offer no protection because infected air can escape from the sides, the top, and the bottom of the mask.

You need to get with the program. N95 masks is whats needed
 
Last edited:

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,701
6,779
113
Surgical masks offer no protection because infected air can escape from the sides, the top, and the bottom of the mask.

You need to get with the program. N95 masks is whats needed
Keep promoting your stupidity. Obviously you have no interest in reality or science. I've said all along that if you want 100% protection you need a suit with self-contained breathing and a chemical shower room in the airlock at the entrance to your home. Everything else including N95s are just partial protection based on potential risk.

p.s. Along with an N95 allowing 5% of particles to escape by definition, your guestimated fit lets air escape too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113
Keep promoting your stupidity. Obviously you have no interest in reality or science. I've said all along that if you want 100% protection you need a suit with self-contained breathing and a chemical shower room in the airlock at the entrance to your home. Everything else including N95s are just partial protection based on potential risk.

p.s. Along with an N95 allowing 5% of particles to escape by definition, your guestimated fit lets air escape too
The only one who keeps promoting stupidity is you.
You've lost this debate. Admit it and move on
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,824
10,165
113
Toronto
Keep promoting your stupidity. Obviously you have no interest in reality or science. I've said all along that if you want 100% protection you need a suit with self-contained breathing and a chemical shower room in the airlock at the entrance to your home. Everything else including N95s are just partial protection based on potential risk.

p.s. Along with an N95 allowing 5% of particles to escape by definition, your guestimated fit lets air escape too...
...which does not guarantee transmission. Even if 10% it does not guarantee transmission. Same with 30%. Same with50%.

5% is better than 30% obviously, but both of them have decreased the amount of a breath/virus. The lower the concentration of virus, the less chance that it will find a target. Even if a target is found, it does not mean that it will result in transmission. It may not find an exposed mucous membrane or other portal of entry in which case there is no transmission. And even if it is transmitted it is not guaranteed that the person would become infected. Not everyone who comes in contact with measles gets measles. Not everbody who has unsafe sex with an AIDS patient will get AIDS. Not one step has a 100% chance of successfully advancing the process.

Every step of the process from exhalation to a virus infection have percentages. It is not the all or nothing way to look at it, that you seem to take. It is a matter of taking enough precautions to decrease the percentages. A mask that stops 85% is taking a huge chunk out of those percentages immediately.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,701
6,779
113
...which does not guarantee transmission. Even if 10% it does not guarantee transmission. Same with 30%. Same with50%.

5% is better than 30% obviously, but both of them have decreased the amount of a breath/virus. The lower the concentration of virus, the less chance that it will find a target. Even if a target is found, it does not mean that it will result in transmission. It may not find an exposed mucous membrane or other portal of entry in which case there is no transmission. And even if it is transmitted it is not guaranteed that the person would become infected. Not everyone who comes in contact with measles gets measles. Not everbody who has unsafe sex with an AIDS patient will get AIDS. Not one step has a 100% chance of successfully advancing the process.

Every step of the process from exhalation to a virus infection have percentages. It is not the all or nothing way to look at it, that you seem to take. It is a matter of taking enough precautions to decrease the percentages. A mask that stops 85% is taking a huge chunk out of those percentages immediately.
Phil doesn't believe in probabilities, only absolutes.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113
So you still stick to the claim that N95 masks work and other masks don't? Even though it has been shown N95 aren't 100% protection either?
There is no such thing as 100% protection.

However, the numbers show that current mask usage isnt working and that N95 masks are needed
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,747
4,914
113
There is no such thing as 100% protection.

However, the numbers show that current mask usage isnt working and that N95 masks are needed
When we dropped to 100 cases a day it was because we were outside, lots of mask wearing, people buying in.

When flu season hit, along with indoors, isolation fatigue, schools back, and the holiday season it ranmped up.

Since lockdown occured and mask wearing back up we are declining again from near 4000 cases to 2500.

Masks work as a part of several measures. Nothing is 100% but if masks reduce by even 50% as a part of the other measures then they are needed.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113
When we dropped to 100 cases a day it was because we were outside, lots of mask wearing, people buying in.

When flu season hit, along with indoors, isolation fatigue, schools back, and the holiday season it ranmped up.

Since lockdown occured and mask wearing back up we are declining again from near 4000 cases to 2500.

Masks work as a part of several measures. Nothing is 100% but if masks reduce by even 50% as a part of the other measures then they are needed
The masks people are currently wearing arent reducing new cases by 50%. Like not even close.

The only thing that has stopped/reduced the 2nd wave is the lockdown.
And in Quebec they went even a step further by implementing a curfew, and that worked even better
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,901
1,210
113
However, the numbers show that current mask usage isnt working and that N95 masks are needed
Absolutely incorrect.
The numbers do not show anything to do with mask usage not working, they actually show the exact opposite, you’re just immune to facts.
What the numbers do show is that a small but a significant percentage of the population in Canada are disobeying the preventive measures guidelines to combat the virus which in affect has been increasing the rate of transmission.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,901
1,210
113
The masks people are currently wearing arent reducing new cases by 50%. Like not even close.

The only thing that has stopped/reduced the 2nd wave is the lockdown.
And in Quebec they went even a step further by implementing a curfew, and that worked even better
You just contradicted your own earlier statements about masks “mask usage isnt working” let’s see how long it will take you to figure out what the cause is for the increase in cases.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113
Absolutely incorrect.
The numbers do not show anything to do with mask usage not working, they actually show the exact opposite, you’re just immune to facts
New infections tripled a few months after masks were mandated. You are once again wrong
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,747
4,914
113
The masks people are currently wearing arent reducing new cases by 50%. Like not even close.

The only thing that has stopped/reduced the 2nd wave is the lockdown.
And in Quebec they went even a step further by implementing a curfew, and that worked even better
US numbers vs ours add to my argument. Per capita we are much better with a very similar demographic.

To say masks don't help reduce transmission is stupid Phil. Doctors have been doing it for over a century now. In operating theatres and wards around the world.

Every percentage helps.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
27,037
5,159
113
US numbers vs ours add to my argument. Per capita we are much better with a very similar demographic.

To say masks don't help reduce transmission is stupid Phil. Doctors have been doing it for over a century now. In operating theatres and wards around the world.

Every percentage helps
Not when you take into account a virus thats as contagious as Covid.

The masks people are currently wearing has air that escaped from the sides, the top and the bottom.
The virus is airborne, in a small confined space like a store, a streetcar or bus, that air will circulate itself within minutes and infect others around you.

Current masks people are wearing dont do shit, and the numbers would back up that assertion
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,824
10,165
113
Toronto
Not when you take into account a virus thats as contagious as Covid.

The masks people are currently wearing has air that escaped from the sides, the top and the bottom.
The virus is airborne, in a small confined space like a store, a streetcar or bus, that air will circulate itself within minutes and infect others around you.

Current masks people are wearing dont do shit, and the numbers would back up that assertion
You have lost the debate. You're beginning to sound like c-m.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts