11 ms·
>You'd lose 100% of that benefit. But 100% is still not much. What would even be the point then? That'd just be reduced to obstinate anti-maskers wearing lace
by VectorLock 6y ago
>You'd lose 100% of that benefit. But 100% is still not much.
What would even be the point then? That'd just be reduced to obstinate anti-maskers wearing lace 'masks.'
- jlokier 6y agoThe GPP describes an inhalation value. The mask still protects other people from transmission by you. Anti-maskers wearing lace 'masks' does not protect other people. They are completely different, and that is the main point of mask wearing for the general public - to protect each other by reducing the chance of ourselves transmitting it if we have it.
- VectorLock 6y agoProtecting others is the main point but protecting yourself is still very important and shouldn't be discarded. You're pretty much back at ubiquitous and widely available surgical style masks at that point.