Is the Coronavirus a Joke to some People?
- Thread starter healthfreak
- Start date
- Status
The fibers are charged as well. My understanding is that contributes in some fashion. My biggest goal is to just not ruin the things and keep them functional as long as possible.
When they first started exploring cloth face coverings I thought they were one step above horse apples. Maybe it’s being more confident that this stuff is truly droplet precautions, or maybe I’m just optimistic today seeing a couple outbreaks slow around me, but I feel better about them, and there are some meta-analyses to feed my bias.
Last edited:
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
If we are getting all sciency - comparing particle size and pore size are imperfect measures of filtration effectiveness. Considerations of pore geometry, particle geometry, particle density, charge of each, hydrophobicity of each, and a dozen other considerations have a hand in it. I can’t speak to this exact situation but there are many examples in the real world where a particle smaller than the pore size is effectively filtered.
Last edited:
I think the biggest benefit of wearing a mask, for me, is that it's a constant reminder that I'm supposed to be careful. I'm much better about not touching my face, keeping my distance from others, and sanitizing surfaces when I'm wearing the mask. When I don't have one on it's easy to forget some of those things and act "normal".
dcopas78
Well-known member
Very true, but filters only filter so much, which is what I was eluding to. If you are going to wear masks, change them often. The longer you wear it, the less effective it becomes. We don't run our water filters indefinitely without backwashing or recharging, a face mask is no different. Except in the case of a facemask, it should be thrown out obviously.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Agreed - I was more responding to the very often cited particle size/pore size comparison as being somehow by itself proof of a point.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
Little nugget on masks that I found very telling. We had an employee test positive for C19. He carpooled to work, about a 30 minute drive, with 3 other people. He was quarantined for 14 days starting 2 days prior to when he tested positive. The other 3 in the car were quarantined for 14 days starting the day he tested positive. The three of them had carpooled for 3 days from when he presumably picked up the virus. At no time did any of the 4 people wear a mask while in the car together. I asked the representative from the State Health department, if they had been wearing masks would it have made any difference in the need to quarantine the other three individuals, she said no. The use of a mask would make NO difference in the need to quarantine. The only exemption from this is for healthcare workers. If they are wearing a mask and come into close contact with a person that is positive they do not have to quarantine. When I asked why they received this exemption and no one else she said if they didn't do this for healthcare workers, all of them would be at home quarantined.
BTW, the positive person is doing fine. Felt bad for a couple of days. The other three all had no symptoms.
BTW, the positive person is doing fine. Felt bad for a couple of days. The other three all had no symptoms.
I may be missing it, but did any of the other 3 test positive?
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
No.
Cheesehead
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2017
- Messages
- 1,046
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
It's unconstitutional to make me wear pants
I won't post it here, but don't forget to google "wearing a mask with your nose out meme" as well lol
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
If we had an epidemic of people peeing on other people in this world and the proposed solution was, "everyone should just wear pants", would you think that was a smart solution?
Cheesehead
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2017
- Messages
- 1,046
On balance, I’m pro pants.
I think if there was an epidemic of people peeing on each other, people would be more interested in staying home than under the current circumstances, where it is only a deadly disease.
Working for Denver, if anyone approaches us we have to wear them so have to have it around the neck all day while we climb trees and such. I use a buff but have cut it in half. Way less material on your neck when not wearing and nothing on your neck when not wearing.
seeth07
Well-known member
I don't believe this image really is a fair comparison. A more fair comparison would be:
The Fart Test:
If we all run around naked and someone farts near you, you smell it right away.
If you are wearing pants and someone farts near you, you still smell it right away.
If the guy who farts near you is also wearing pants, you still smell it but maybe not right away.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
In the case of any of the described scenarios, it is not likely to infect your lungs. The coronavirus is.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
The buff has definitely be the way to go as far as exercise. I'd say in doors masks wearing is 100% here, outside maybe 75% with the 25% mainly excersising in early morning or late evening. That's people who just don't have one with them period, pretty much everyone is up and down game as they pass people game.
NH, VT, and upstate NY were very different. Very low mask rates comparatively. Urban v. Rural though so makes sense.
It's not the smell of the fart that you worry about, it's the microscopic fecal matter you don't want to leave their anus and land on you. So it is a good analogy, once you change smell for fecal matter.
Which is why I love hunt talk. We can have adult conversations about fecal matter and farts and nobody laughs.
But, you have to remember, you are wearing pants in case you're walking around farting and don't realize it. You're not wearing pants to protect you from the farts of the other guy.
- Status
