I cannot fathom why there aren't additional studies (with N >> 10 for each type of mask) being performed and sanctioned by the CDC, HHS, or whoever. Surely it's not like Trump himself gets wind (harhar!) of a mask testing scheme and shuts it down personally. Has he so thoroughly hollowed out federal scientific representation that we're left to rely on the spare time of university professors? Btw, this seems an appropriate place to wrap this up (but not with a fleece material?): I realized a couple months ago that a ballistic treatment is not physical here at standard-temperature-pressure: Air is highly collisional (and I'm highly dumb sometimes). Di-Nitrogen (N2), the majority constituent, collides with other air particles a few billion times each second. The frequency of collisions will be even higher for covid-19, a much larger molecule. Thus, the propagation is indeed governed by fluid flow and turbulence. The takeaway is that it really is about as simple as "can you blow out a candle while wearing your mask?". As for how long the virus can linger on surfaces, hopefully there's a bored physicist or chemist with lab access somewhere, I guess? Imagine if we had an actual government.
Debating the finer points of improvised mask materials is a waste of time when a significant portion of the country refuses to wear masks at all. The very headline of this post just provides fodder for the anti-mask crowd to dismiss the benefits of wearing masks of any kind.
Heard about this study. Annoyed by it. I mean you can tell when you're running in a gaiter that it's not doing a helluva lot of filtering. However you're hot sticky miserable and can't fucking breathe so it's gotta be doing something. This study has the right idea in that they're doing droplet counts? But they're doing droplet counts six inches from your face in a dark box for forty seconds. And as a result, they're saying that this: is worse than this: They've got eight pages of supplemental material, including four on calibrating the camera, but all you get of the box they're doing their testing in is this: The lead author is all about "exploring novel nonlinear optical contrast mechanisms for molecular imaging." And that's awesome. But it's like that time the German dumbasses decided to model a jogger in ANSYS and make the public decide that joggers were literally satan despite the fact that they hadn't modeled anything other than the particulate flow of a smokestack next to a face. I mean, look at that bottom graph again. Those sure look like exhalations, don't they? And you'd think if they ran a whole bunch of runs on this thing, they'd stop lining up, right? yet somehow there's some wicked peaks, as if they did exactly one run. I'm sorry, I don't believe that. Those graphs aren't averaged. This is "talk into the box and we'll let the counter hum for 40 seconds."For each mask and for the control trial, this protocol was repeated 10 times.
Well, no, not necessarily. They’re saying a “gaiter type neck fleece”, which could have various meaning. All they say is “fleece” which to me indicates PET? Without really digging into the studies tables and appendices I’m not quite sure. So, one type of gaiter with a specified material is bad.
Your comment covers everything I have to say about this study. That it’s a bad conclusion/discussion and they should feel bad. Especially relating it to that stupid jogger study that has to argue with everybody in real life over for three weeks but I would like to add that those authors had not-insignificant ties to Russia.
Shortly after the Beirut explosion someone on Twitter marveled that all the COVID experts in his feed were also demolitions experts. I'm certainly guilty. We all are. In lieu of actual expertise we all through our best take up on Medium or whatever and before long we've got motivational speakers solving coronavirus. I made a living using fluid mechanics models for about eight years. That gives me the confidence to state that a Ph.D molecule counter better know hella more about counting particles with lasers than I do, but doesn't necessarily have a firm grasp on how to apply that count to a real-world situation. I want to believe they did their experiment in a dark shoe box in order to get a "more study needed" grant to do it in a room so that you'd actually get semi-useful real-world data. But I'm concerned that they figured a shoebox and a hair salon were equivalent because they're too overconfident to ask someone who knows. I mean, there were people to ask.
I only scanned the summary, but didn't see a clear definition of each mask. It would be nice if they published more info on the masks themselves so that we can make informed decisions as to which mask we want. In the picture half the masks look homemade. What materials did they use? What thickness? What did they use for filters, or did they use filters? I'm too lazy to research so a clear guide would be more helpful. I'm sure I'm not alone.
I had to Google "neck gaiter" cause I was unfamiliar with the term. I'm not unfamiliar with the object though. I've seen them for years and to be as kind yet blunt as possible, I don't find them fashionable at all. Re-usable face masks are way cooler, especially if they're home made. Everywhere you turn, you're surrounded by ninjas, like it's halloween or something, but it's all awesome stuff like quilting ladies sporting floral prints, little kids repping Sponge Bob or Paw Patrol, or more fashionable people accessorizing awesomely with jackets, shoes, earrings, etc. Shoot, even the plain white cotton ones, that frankly make it look like you're wearing underwear on your face, look better than neck gaiters.
I legit went running in a KN95 and made it 250 yards. Then I spent $40 on a fuckin' Buff so that at least I was wearing something. And I wear it, whenever I'm within 50 yards of anyone, rain or shine, sun or overcast, until they're more than 50 yards away. And it's hot, and I have to keep my fucking jaw open, and it's a bitch to breathe through, and 95% of the time I'm the only person in that encounter wearing the fucking thing anyway but it is literally the best solution I've found for attempting to exercise in the open air while also trying to bend the fucking curve. I know you're in a shitty mood? But the speed and vigor with which you dismiss everyone but yourself is getting really tiresome.
Just got back from another pathetic 1.75 mile run. - saw 17 people - 4 hospital masks - 2 bandannas - 2 cloth masks Highest number of masks I've ever counted, perhaps because four of them were county workers. This is in a working-class enclave of liberal Seattle, less than 3 miles equidistant between the first published and second published outbreaks of COVID in the United States.
I didn't expect the loose weave to be the problem... I figured the problem with those is that they direct all of your breath straight DOWN... onto your hands and the countertop of the coffee shop you are visiting. So they actually would create MORE of a problem than no mask at all... at least with no mask, you are dispersing cooties directly into the air, rather than focusing them on the surfaces that are most likely to result in transmission...