Masks don't prevent transmission of Viruses

[Hawkeye10]

Help with what? I agree with Evmetro.

What are you smoking....I want some!

Avmetro has nothing to do with APL and me.

 

[Lightbringer]

What are you smoking....I want some!

Avmetro has nothing to do with APL and me.

Evmetro is the OP.

 

[Lightbringer]

No idea how I hurt his feelings. Why create a thread and not expect people to disagree or address the claims?

Good question. Ask him.

 

[AProudLefty]

Your article is about the N95. Do most people wear that? When you go to the store and have to wear a mask are you wearing an N95? This is not relevant to most of us.

It's relevant to the size. The number 95 is due to 95% efficiency. There are other articles posted by others but I didn't save them. Also there's a video of 4 scenarios. 1. No mask. 2. Normal mask. 3. Surgical mask. 4. N95. Using laser technology and slow motion, you can see the difference.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Evmetro is the OP.

Water is sometimes green.

 

[Lightbringer]

It's relevant to the size. The number 95 is due to 95% efficiency. There are other articles posted by others but I didn't save them. Also there's a video of 4 scenarios. 1. No mask. 2. Normal mask. 3. Surgical mask. 4. N95. Using laser technology and slow motion, you can see the difference.

LOL. First of all that is not what 95 means.

Second of all, your article had nothing to do with the masks almost all of us have been ordered to wear.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Till tomorrow.....the Hound needs to go out, and I am moving to alternate entertainment when we get back.

 

[AProudLefty]

LOL. First of all that is not what 95 means.

Second of all, your article had nothing to do with the masks almost all of us have been ordered to wear.

That's what the article said.

"N95 masks actually have that name because they are 95% efficient at stopping particles in their least efficient particle size range — in this case those around 0.3 microns."

And I know it's about the N95 masks, but if you read further, the relevant parts are about the Brownian motion and static electricity. The normal masks are notorious for that.

I wish I had saved those links. I might try to look tomorrow.

 

[Lightbringer]

That's what the article said.

"N95 masks actually have that name because they are 95% efficient at stopping particles in their least efficient particle size range — in this case those around 0.3 microns."

And I know it's about the N95 masks, but if you read further, the relevant parts are about the Brownian motion and static electricity. The normal masks are notorious for that.

I wish I had saved those links. I might try to look tomorrow.

Allow me to explain why the article is wrong about the N95 masks. The point of masks isn't to filter out 95% of shit...they have to filter out 100% otherwise they're not reliable.

 

[RB 60]

Wearing a mask indoors fogs up my glasses. Is that the 5% that escapes? Will taking my glasses off make my mask 100% effective?




Just askin'

 

[AProudLefty]

Allow me to explain why the article is wrong about the N95 masks. The point of masks isn't to filter out 95% of shit...they have to filter out 100% otherwise they're not reliable.

What is 100% reliable? Disinfectants aren't 100% reliable. That's why the labels always say 99.9%. The only thing is 100% reliable is a fucking hazmat suit.

The point is to MITIGATE the risk. Social distancing and masks reduce the transmission. It isn't 100% but still better.

 

[AProudLefty]

Wearing a mask indoors fogs up my glasses. Is that the 5% that escapes? Will taking my glasses off make my mask 100% effective?




Just askin'

That's humidity. Try moving to Arizona.

 

[RB 60]

That's humidity. Try moving to Arizona.

I could drive my convertible year 'round...

 

[Lightbringer]

What is 100% reliable? Disinfectants aren't 100% reliable. That's why the labels always say 99.9%. The only thing is 100% reliable is a fucking hazmat suit.

The point is to MITIGATE the risk. Social distancing and masks reduce the transmission. It isn't 100% but still better.

It's quite simple. If you know that a contaminant you have to deal with is 1/2 a micron wide then the masks better filter out those contaminants. If you don't then you're legally liable...unless you're the government trying to get people back to work during a pandemic.

 

[AProudLefty]

I could drive my convertible year 'round...

That sure sounds like fun!

 

[Lightbringer]

That sure sounds like fun!

I'd bang Beverly D'Angelo over Christie Brinkley. Is it just me?

 

[AProudLefty]

It's quite simple. If you know that a contaminant you have to deal with is 1/2 a micron wide then the masks better filter out those contaminants. If you don't then you're legally liable...unless you're the government trying to get people back to work during a pandemic.

So does that mean everyone has to wear hazmat suits for it to be 100% effective? The movies Outbreak and Contagion have them.

It sure would look funny.

 

[AProudLefty]

I'd bang Beverly D'Angelo over Christie Brinkley. Is it just me?

It isn't just you. Beverly is very funny.

 

[Lightbringer]

So does that mean everyone has to wear hazmat suits for it to be 100% effective? The movies Outbreak and Contagion have them.

It sure would look funny.

You're making a joke but...yeah.

 

[AProudLefty]

You're making a joke but...yeah.

Well yeah. But I mean almost nothing is 100% effective. Even 25% effective is better than none at all.

Nobody is claiming that any kinds of masks stop anything 100% of the time.

Evmetro's claim is that masks are ZERO PERCENT effective. That's one thing I wanted to address. Also he showed that the size of virus particles are smaller which is correct. Nobody disputes that. What the OP failed to address is the Brownian motion and static electricity.