Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Studies I've seen show that masks do a pretty good job of protecting others. They do a less efficient job of protecting the mask wearer. But some protection is better than no protection. If a mask reduces your chance of being infected by only 25%, I'll happy take the 25% reduction over the other option, which is no protection at all.
How much protection the mask wearer is going to get depends upon the type of mask and how carefully it is handled. A good mask, properly handled and properly worn is going to provide quite bit of protection.
Can you link to a study, please? I have been unable to find one.
Please don't cite the wet washcloth one or the article that says, "Are You Still Confused . . . " Those are partly irrelevant and partly out-of-date. Please don't post a diagram of people coughing through masks. I mean I want to see the actual study.
A study that would be relevant is one that studies the non-coughing asymptomatic person and compares how much virus is emitted with cloth mask versus without mask.
The whole mask-wearing is based on the assumption that people without symptoms may still be spreading covid-19, and that that spread will be greatly reduced if the asymptomatic person wears a mask. Because we don't know who those people are, everyone wears a mask. So what we need to know is, does this particular thing work?
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,759 posts, read 58,161,153 times
Reputation: 46263
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
Can you link to a study, please? I have been unable to find one.
...
A study that would be relevant is one that studies the non-coughing asymptomatic person and compares how much virus is emitted with cloth mask versus without mask.
The whole mask-wearing is based on the assumption that people without symptoms may still be spreading covid-19, and that that spread will be greatly reduced if the asymptomatic person wears a mask. Because we don't know who those people are, everyone wears a mask. So what we need to know is, does this particular thing work?
The science I have seen refers to the expelling of droplets (of which serve as a virus 'carrier') those droplets end up on surfaces, sometimes your face when in close proximity. Then there is the question of 'airborne' virus (Which is far less understood, or traced, tho there are some studies for this.)
Masks are only one of many incremental tools available, none of which are a sole sure solution.
Adding a face shield is an additional tool.
As is a bio suit.
Of course, the CDC could be "assuming" it too - but their info is good enough for me. You won't find any "official" source in any country, anywhere, that does not agree that at least some non-symptomatic spread is happening. Early Chinese estimates blamed 80% of the spread on 20% of the folks with no symptoms. Not sure how that post aged, but the point is, this has been considered A Thing from the very beginning, and has never changed, and there is no reason to doubt that it happens. It happens with the Regular Old Flu and many other things, too - why would COVID be different?
Meantime -
The virus does not have wings. Although tiny, even without droplets it's forced to Ride The Wind. Wind from your mouth. Wind that (obeying the laws of physics) can't possibly go As Far from you when you have a Wind Barrier in front of your mouth. Physically impossible. It is not (strictly) about "how much" virus is "filtered." Zero, as far as I'm concerned, although logic says it's not zero. The point is to limit how far my "wind" goes when it hits an obstacle directly in front of my mouth. Pretty sure there is no "study" showing that - because no one should need one.
We had an illness go through work in late February, mild cold and flu like symptoms and loss of taste(I remember having some pork and Chinese hot mustard and I thought the mustard was a bad bottle because it wasn't hot lol). What burns me is seeing how many people have anti-bodies would clarify a lot about how severe Covid-19 was, or isn't. Yet that's "not priority" and we can't get tested as we have no symptoms. To me it seems like it's the democrats agenda to keep their scary pandemic control tool in place.
I feel the threat of Covid-19 is real and it can kill, just like the flu. But I'd bet a lot more people have had it and don't know it and while sad, the real death rate compared to all those really infected is a far lower %.
I ask this question because of the reports by our local Health care official in Clallam county and I am sure in other Washington counties as well.
Seems the reporting to me is misleading. Why report cases that no longer exist? Should the cases reported be an up to date count. I mean we have had 102 cases as of this morning and only 28 active case. Why report on inactive cases?
I think I read the other day that a cases was hospitalized but was that case a direct result of the virus or a case where a patients was entering the hospital for something else and found to have the virus? It was total unclear if it was hospitalized related to the virus or not.
I believe the information put forth by the state/county should be placed on actual active case and cases being hospitalized for the virus and death directly connected to the virus.
Another problem I am reading is why with so few cases are the ages being withheld?
I was glad to see the break down in case by community in the PDN the other day. That is a positive reflection of where the number of case really are. In Sequim, where I live, it appears according to the below chart only two active cases and 29 recovered cases out of 31 total.
The issue is Clallam County's website. They're probably dealing with a much lower budget that the more populous counties so their website isn't as detailed. I'm including a link to Thurston County's page because that's my county, but I would bet that King and the other more populated counties have even better coronavirus pages than Thurston County does.
Thurston County has separate daily update totals and long-term summary totals, and then they've got lots of other interesting charts and figures too, including a zip code map that shows where the most cases have occurred.
The science I have seen refers to the expelling of droplets (of which serve as a virus 'carrier') those droplets end up on surfaces, sometimes your face when in close proximity. Then there is the question of 'airborne' virus (Which is far less understood, or traced, tho there are some studies for this.)
I'm looking for a study, please, not a meme. People can make clever or funny pictures of all sorts of things. These appeal to people on an emotional level. I'm looking for actual science.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roodd279
The whole mask-wearing is based on the assumption that people without symptoms may still be spreading covid-19.
Of course, the CDC could be "assuming" it too - but their info is good enough for me.
. . .
3. The virus does not have wings. Although tiny, even without droplets it's forced to Ride The Wind. Wind from your mouth. Wind that (obeying the laws of physics) can't possibly go As Far from you when you have a Wind Barrier in front of your mouth. Physically impossible. It is not (strictly) about "how much" virus is "filtered." Zero, as far as I'm concerned, although logic says it's not zero. 4. The point is to limit how far my "wind" goes when it hits an obstacle directly in front of my mouth. Pretty sure there is no "study" showing that - because no one should need one.
1. "Assumption" does not mean "guess." I'm using it more like the "if" in an "if-then" statement.
2. It's interesting that you chose this page to link to. I think sometimes people see a link from some authority, like CDC, and assume that the link supports what the poster is talking about.
This particular CDC page is the one that gives the different possible outcomes for different scenarios. They're saying, basically, "There are things we don't know about covid-19, so here's what will happen if . . . Then they give five different scenarios, based on . . . assumptions. "IF this is true, THEN we expect this to happen. But we don't know WHICH of the IF's are true." This is what the CDC says on this page.
Interesting also, that you chose a page which doesn't even include the word "mask" to respond to my request for a link about mask research.
3. I'm glad you realize the virus doesn't have wings. When I drive through residential neighborhoods and see masked solitary people walking their dogs, I wonder if maybe people don't know this.
When a person coughs or sneezes, whatever virus they may have spews out in their "wind." I'll agree with that. However, when a person is not coughing or sneezing or shouting or singing . . . the virus put out from normal nose-breathing is minimal, the droplets put out are minimal, . . . and they go down to the ground quickly. I have not seen a study done with covid-19, but this is true for influenza. Covid-19 has been found aerosolized near hospital toilets (China), and it has been aerosolized under laboratory conditions. Some suspect that it can be aerosolized outside of the lab, but if so, it would be from coughing, sneezing, maybe shouting or singing. Generally it is contained in droplets. Droplets from nose-breathing don't go flying out six feet, or even four feet. As you said, . . . no wings.
That's why we have the six-foot guideline (which in Europe is about half that, as viruses in Europe apparently are better behaved and fall faster than our wild, rebellious American version).
4. If your mask is stopping your wind, how are you even breathing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkcarguy
We had an illness go through work in late February, mild cold and flu like symptoms and loss of taste(I remember having some pork and Chinese hot mustard and I thought the mustard was a bad bottle because it wasn't hot lol). What burns me is seeing how many people have anti-bodies would clarify a lot about how severe Covid-19 was, or isn't. Yet that's "not priority" and we can't get tested as we have no symptoms. To me it seems like it's the democrats agenda to keep their scary pandemic control tool in place.
I feel the threat of Covid-19 is real and it can kill, just like the flu. But I'd bet a lot more people have had it and don't know it and while sad, the real death rate compared to all those really infected is a far lower %.
If you look at states that had it really bad, like New York and New Jersey, you see that their cases and deaths are way, way down. Once about 20% of the population has had it, the virus spread slows way down. At first it was thought that about 60 or 70 percent would need to get it to achieve some herd protection, but it turns out that's not the case.
Here in Washington we aren't there yet, but if enough otherwise-healthy people get it and recover, we may be soon. Maybe the protests have done something good, after all.
Further reading, if you're interested. I don't know if this list includes the one that talks about T-cells and B-cells and why it isn't necessary to have actual antibodies, or if it includes the one that explains why such a high percentage of people seem to have some natural immunity, even though this virus is "novel." If not, I can look for them some other time.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,759 posts, read 58,161,153 times
Reputation: 46263
Many people expel droplets 1m+ while normally speaking, so be sure to keep your mouth shut at all times while in public spaces.
Yes, there are studies proving this. Or you can prove it yourself by exposing your body, coffee or food to them.
Since I have "pay-per-byte" dialup, I'll let you search for your approved studies. I find most of mine from international universities. At the moment, Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand, and India seem to be leading the research.
... The whole mask-wearing is based on the assumption that people without symptoms may still be spreading covid-19, and that that spread will be greatly reduced if the asymptomatic person wears a mask. Because we don't know who those people are, everyone wears a mask. So what we need to know is, does this particular thing work?
I suggest that everyone keep in mind that many viruses remain in the body forever and can pop up with symptoms many years later. Since no one knows what this virus will do, that should provide motivation to avoid getting infected with the thing. It's highly contagious; do whatever you can to avoid it.
I have seen nothing to suggest that coronaviruses do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sll3454
Can you link to a study, please? I have been unable to find one.
Please don't cite the wet washcloth one or the article that says, "Are You Still Confused . . . " Those are partly irrelevant and partly out-of-date. Please don't post a diagram of people coughing through masks. I mean I want to see the actual study.
A study that would be relevant is one that studies the non-coughing asymptomatic person and compares how much virus is emitted with cloth mask versus without mask.
The whole mask-wearing is based on the assumption that people without symptoms may still be spreading covid-19, and that that spread will be greatly reduced if the asymptomatic person wears a mask. Because we don't know who those people are, everyone wears a mask. So what we need to know is, does this particular thing work?
An asymptomatic person is by definition infected. The experiment you are describing would be extremely hazardous to the investigators conducting it.
The virus is known to be spread by droplets, so studies of droplets serve as a surrogate for studies with live virus.
I have seen nothing to suggest that coronaviruses do that.
An asymptomatic person is by definition infected. The experiment you are describing would be extremely hazardous to the investigators conducting it.
The virus is known to be spread by droplets, so studies of droplets serve as a surrogate for studies with live virus.
Perhaps you misunderstand. I'm not talking about potentially infecting people. Let me explain.
A study (published in early April) was conducted with people who had influenza virus, rhinovirus, or coronavirus (not covid-19, but several seasonal human coronaviruses). They had them sit alone in the test room for a specified period of time (30 minutes). They counted how many times the person coughed, and at the end of the time period they measured the virus present in droplets and aerosols. The test was repeated with the subject wearing a surgical mask.
As far as I can tell, it was scientifically sound. The results showed that the surgical masks did reduce the amount of virus emitted by coughing people during that time period. They also separated out the results to see the differences among the viruses. The general result was that the surgical masks helped, but the results were different for the different viruses: Coronavirus: the "difference was significant in aerosols and showed a trend toward reduced detection in respiratory droplets."
Rhinovirus: "there were no significant differences between detection of virus with or without face masks, both in respiratory droplets and in aerosols" Influenza: "there was a significant reduction by wearing face masks to 1 of 27 (4%) in detection of influenza virus in respiratory droplets, but no significant reduction in detection in aerosols."
There were a few asymptomatic people in the study, and they did separate out the results of those who did not cough. For those who did not cough, there was no difference in the amount of virus found - masked v. unmasked. This actually suggests that there is no point in asymptomatic people wearing the masks. However, because the sample size of non-coughers was small, I would not draw any conclusion from that part. (Actually, when you separate out the groups, all were pretty small. It was interesting nonetheless.)
As many good studies and experiments do, it raises a follow-up questions that could be the starting point for additional experiments. The experiment relevant to the current situation would be like that one, except that cloth masks would be used instead of surgical masks, and the participants would be asymptomatic.
This would not need to be dangerous to the participants or to the researchers, unless they were careless or negligent (as is true of many scientific experiments, even in high school chemistry lab).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
