11 ms·

>masked with N95s I see this as an example of confusion between population-level and individual protection. Widespread use of N95s is great at keeping the hosp

by mrob 3y ago

>masked with N95s I see this as an example of confusion between population-level and individual protection. Widespread use of N95s is great at keeping the hospitals from overcrowding, but if somebody is serious about personally avoiding COVID, 95% percent filtration seems rather low (and there's leakage around the sides too.) If they were truly serious about avoiding COVID, they'd use an elastomeric half-face respirator at the minimum (which has the bonus feature of being more comfortable to wear).

TylerE 3y ago
The N95 guarantees a minimum of 95% filtration at the worst possible particle size, which airborne virus particles are not. The 3M 9210s I’ve been wearing since 2021 have been independelty tested as having >99.5% filtration efficiency at the relevant particle size, and that’s with physical testing so stuff like ability of the make to seal is also being tested. Zero COVID infections here.
- t0bia_s 3y ago
  Potential Applications Include: Bagging, grinding, sanding, sawing, sweeping, woodworking and other dusty applications. source: https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/813534O/3m-aura-particulate-respirator-9210-and-9211-n95.pdf https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/813534O/3m-aura-particul... No words about viruses. Also, I recommend you to make IgG test for covid antibodies. Most likely you already have some.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    How are you managing to read "Potential Applications Include" as "The following is an exhaustive list of all possible applications"?
    - TylerE 3y ago
      They would never list healthcare on the general purpose version anyway, since there is a separate specific certification for that. The only difference is better fluid protection, which is irrelevant to the given threat model. They do indeed sell that. https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/v101143973/ https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/v101143973/ And whatta ya know... "This healthcare N95 particulate respirator and surgical mask has comfortable inner materials and helps provide respiratory protection against certain airborne biological particles. The individually packaged, flat-fold design allows for convenient storage prior to use. Fluid-resistant surgical masks help reduce your exposure to blood and body fluids. Cleared for sale by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)." Notice it's still "just" an N95.
  - logifail 3y ago
    > I recommend you to make IgG test for covid antibodies. Most likely you already have some I've had Covid at least twice since this nightmare started, most recently in November 2023. After both a chest x-ray and a CT scan in hospital eventually a Covid PCR test[0] came back positive and at that point the mood lightened and the doctors told me that a positive Covid test was "the good news" and to go home and rest. I appreciate Covid is still a threat to some elderly and/or sick people. To the majority of us, it isn't ... and wasn't ... ever [1][2] [0] Unwitting comedy moment from the (otherwise friendly and apparently competent) student doctor. Took my history very thoroughly, felt my glands, examined ears and looked down throat. All without her wearing any kind of mask. Then late on she decided to take a Covid swab, so left the small room that we'd been in together for 10+ minutes to retrieve swab and FFP mask, which she donned to swab my nostrils. Am afraid I giggled when I saw her go get the mask, had to tell a lie to avoid exposing the utter nonsense of fetching one at that stage :) [1] https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1241297511287046144?lang=en https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1241297511287046144?lan... [2] https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1271696043739172864 https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1271696043739172864
    - stevenAthompson 3y ago
      Did you just cite twitter as if it were a reliable source for medical information? *EDIT* Did you just cite a twitter post that links to some dudes blog as if it were a reliable source of medical information? * EDIT to the EDIT * Did you notice that this dudes blog is PAID, and requires a subscription to access?
      - throwaway2037 3y ago
        +9000 for so many great edits. Internet randos win again. I hope someone will soon post about "reducing inflamation" or "natural foods".
        stevenAthompson 3y ago
        I do not know what this means. Are you ln favor of taking medical advice from Twitter rather than doctors?
ParetoOptimal 3y ago
I prefer elastomeric n99s.
- throwway120385 3y ago
  P100 cartridges are also great and as an added bonus you never have to smell perfume, farts, body odor, or Axe ever again if you don't want to.
cesarb 3y ago
> (and there's leakage around the sides too.) A properly fitted mask shouldn't leak around the sides. The PFF2 (my country's equivalent of N95) mask I use doesn't leak anywhere when properly adjusted. (Like the sibling comment, it's a 3M, either the 9320+BR or the 9360H; see https://www.3m.com.br/3M/pt_BR/p/d/v000465595/ https://www.3m.com.br/3M/pt_BR/p/d/v000465595/ for its page complete with usage instructions.)
- jkubicek 3y ago
  > A properly fitted mask This is exactly why masking isn't as effective as it should be _in aggregate_. N95s aren't foolproof to use even for people who are trying to use them properly, then you have to add in the folks who pull their mask down to cough or to talk.
  - cogman10 3y ago
    My favorite was the chin diaper. Particularly because the state I live in (idaho) never really had strict masking requirements so it really never made any sense.
    - kelnos 3y ago
      I still occasionally see adults out in public wearing the chin diaper, or with the mask partially or mostly covering the mouth but not the nose at all. I just don't get it. Why bother? Public outdoor masking rates even here (San Francisco) are anecdotally well under 10%. Why waste the time and effort (and in some places, social consequences) to do something like that completely ineffectively, when nearly no one else is bothering at all?
      - cesarb 3y ago
        > I just don't get it. Why bother? The "mask on the chin" allows one to quickly pull up the mask to cover the face, at the cost of potentially contaminating the inside of the mask (which then touches the face). The "mask not covering the nose" might be a badly fitted mask slipping down, or it might be the same case as the "mask on the chin" (allowing one to quickly pull up the mask to also cover the nose).
hollerith 3y ago
Against COVID, you would probably get more bang for your buck by protecting the eyes with goggles or by choosing an elastomeric full-face respirator. Anything that lands in the eye ends up in a lacrimal duct, and then in a nasal passage.
gadders 3y ago
Agreed. If you stick a mask on a dummy in a lab and fire COVID at it, it might show pretty good protection. However, at the population level there is no evidence that masking confers any benefit in preventing the spread of COVID. The Cochrane Review demonstrated this: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD... There are also numerous dis-benefits of masking, especially among young children.
- TylerE 3y ago
  Not a study, a review. Also doesn't claim what people like you says it claims. Also, look at the history. Date of the original review is 2007. You know what didn't exist in 2007?
  - zdragnar 3y ago
    > You know what didn't exist in 2007? Airborne viruses?
  - gadders 3y ago
    >>Not a study, a review. It's a meta-analysis of other trials. >>Also doesn't claim what people like you says it claims. By people like me, you mean people who believe in science? This is what it claims: "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence)." >>Also, look at the history. Date of the original review is 2007. You know what didn't exist in 2007? It has been updated several times. The latest edition was published in January 2023. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
- bsder 3y ago
  > However, at the population level there is no evidence that masking confers any benefit in preventing the spread of COVID. 1) Several studies from India seem to contradict this and barely had enough statistical power to be useful. 2) The fact that we can't generate a masking study with sufficient statistical power does NOT disprove the hypothesis--either direction. Citing your source: "The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions." This one REALLY grinds my gears. "Well the study said that masks don't work". No, it fucking didn't. It said they couldn't prove they worked given the data and quality of data they had. And the data was lousy as adherence by the general population was terrible. Things can work and still not be provable--especially when the experiment involves human beings since morally we can't just create two groups and infect one. Here's your counterexample: take a look at what hospitals are still doing when handling Covid patients. Hospitals get to collect data and enforce adherence. They absolutely do not want to transfer Covid between patients. And they do not want to transfer Covid to their staff as that throws things into disarray. Whatever they're doing seems to be working. I had a stint in the hospital recently, and they had several Covid patients on my floor--they weren't isolated to a specific wing or anything anymore. The hospital managed to not give Covid to me, so something they are doing is working. So, what that suggests is that procedures and masks work just fine. What seems to be problematic is lack of adherence to said procedures and masks. Basically, what all of these studies manage to prove is that the general population has enough non-compliant dipshits that active interventions don't work at the population level. Consequenctly, vaccines and other passive interventions that take into account the stupidity of the general population are required.
lawlessone 3y ago
I know this is well known but still worth mentioning again I think. That the "regular" facemasks were primarily so asymptomatic people with covid would spread it less. 100% protection was never possible but anything to delay to spread so that not everybody was sick at the same time was necessary.
- zer00eyz 3y ago
  Yes, I think the global "everyone put on a mask" moment highlighted some large cultural differences. My Asian friends understood that "not sharing germs" was as important as "not getting sick" mask compliance as much about being kind to others as to yourself. It also helps that lots of them were already socially accepting of masks due to climate, pollution and weather (or what ever you want to call dust out of Mongolia every year). I think that there is an interesting corollary with PPE culture in general, one that has changed in my life time (safety glasses and seat belts). I think we saw a lot of that same behavior bleed out to normal people (who don't wear PPE at a day job) in action. All in all there is a cultural aspects at play that are worth looking at.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

by mrob 3y ago

TylerE 3y ago

The N95 guarantees a minimum of 95% filtration at the worst possible particle size, which airborne virus particles are not. The 3M 9210s I’ve been wearing since 2021 have been independelty tested as having >99.5% filtration efficiency at the relevant particle size, and that’s with physical testing so stuff like ability of the make to seal is also being tested. Zero COVID infections here.

t0bia_s 3y ago
Potential Applications Include: Bagging, grinding, sanding, sawing, sweeping, woodworking and other dusty applications. source: https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/813534O/3m-aura-particulate-respirator-9210-and-9211-n95.pdf https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/813534O/3m-aura-particul... No words about viruses. Also, I recommend you to make IgG test for covid antibodies. Most likely you already have some.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  How are you managing to read "Potential Applications Include" as "The following is an exhaustive list of all possible applications"?
  - TylerE 3y ago
    They would never list healthcare on the general purpose version anyway, since there is a separate specific certification for that. The only difference is better fluid protection, which is irrelevant to the given threat model. They do indeed sell that. https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/v101143973/ https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/v101143973/ And whatta ya know... "This healthcare N95 particulate respirator and surgical mask has comfortable inner materials and helps provide respiratory protection against certain airborne biological particles. The individually packaged, flat-fold design allows for convenient storage prior to use. Fluid-resistant surgical masks help reduce your exposure to blood and body fluids. Cleared for sale by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)." Notice it's still "just" an N95.
- logifail 3y ago
  > I recommend you to make IgG test for covid antibodies. Most likely you already have some I've had Covid at least twice since this nightmare started, most recently in November 2023. After both a chest x-ray and a CT scan in hospital eventually a Covid PCR test[0] came back positive and at that point the mood lightened and the doctors told me that a positive Covid test was "the good news" and to go home and rest. I appreciate Covid is still a threat to some elderly and/or sick people. To the majority of us, it isn't ... and wasn't ... ever [1][2] [0] Unwitting comedy moment from the (otherwise friendly and apparently competent) student doctor. Took my history very thoroughly, felt my glands, examined ears and looked down throat. All without her wearing any kind of mask. Then late on she decided to take a Covid swab, so left the small room that we'd been in together for 10+ minutes to retrieve swab and FFP mask, which she donned to swab my nostrils. Am afraid I giggled when I saw her go get the mask, had to tell a lie to avoid exposing the utter nonsense of fetching one at that stage :) [1] https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1241297511287046144?lang=en https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1241297511287046144?lan... [2] https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1271696043739172864 https://twitter.com/d_spiegel/status/1271696043739172864
  - stevenAthompson 3y ago
    Did you just cite twitter as if it were a reliable source for medical information? *EDIT* Did you just cite a twitter post that links to some dudes blog as if it were a reliable source of medical information? * EDIT to the EDIT * Did you notice that this dudes blog is PAID, and requires a subscription to access?
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      +9000 for so many great edits. Internet randos win again. I hope someone will soon post about "reducing inflamation" or "natural foods".
      - stevenAthompson 3y ago
        I do not know what this means. Are you ln favor of taking medical advice from Twitter rather than doctors?

ParetoOptimal 3y ago

I prefer elastomeric n99s.

throwway120385 3y ago
P100 cartridges are also great and as an added bonus you never have to smell perfume, farts, body odor, or Axe ever again if you don't want to.

cesarb 3y ago

> (and there's leakage around the sides too.) A properly fitted mask shouldn't leak around the sides. The PFF2 (my country's equivalent of N95) mask I use doesn't leak anywhere when properly adjusted. (Like the sibling comment, it's a 3M, either the 9320+BR or the 9360H; see https://www.3m.com.br/3M/pt_BR/p/d/v000465595/ https://www.3m.com.br/3M/pt_BR/p/d/v000465595/ for its page complete with usage instructions.)

jkubicek 3y ago
> A properly fitted mask This is exactly why masking isn't as effective as it should be _in aggregate_. N95s aren't foolproof to use even for people who are trying to use them properly, then you have to add in the folks who pull their mask down to cough or to talk.
- cogman10 3y ago
  My favorite was the chin diaper. Particularly because the state I live in (idaho) never really had strict masking requirements so it really never made any sense.
  - kelnos 3y ago
    I still occasionally see adults out in public wearing the chin diaper, or with the mask partially or mostly covering the mouth but not the nose at all. I just don't get it. Why bother? Public outdoor masking rates even here (San Francisco) are anecdotally well under 10%. Why waste the time and effort (and in some places, social consequences) to do something like that completely ineffectively, when nearly no one else is bothering at all?
    - cesarb 3y ago
      > I just don't get it. Why bother? The "mask on the chin" allows one to quickly pull up the mask to cover the face, at the cost of potentially contaminating the inside of the mask (which then touches the face). The "mask not covering the nose" might be a badly fitted mask slipping down, or it might be the same case as the "mask on the chin" (allowing one to quickly pull up the mask to also cover the nose).

hollerith 3y ago

Against COVID, you would probably get more bang for your buck by protecting the eyes with goggles or by choosing an elastomeric full-face respirator. Anything that lands in the eye ends up in a lacrimal duct, and then in a nasal passage.

gadders 3y ago

Agreed. If you stick a mask on a dummy in a lab and fire COVID at it, it might show pretty good protection. However, at the population level there is no evidence that masking confers any benefit in preventing the spread of COVID. The Cochrane Review demonstrated this: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD... There are also numerous dis-benefits of masking, especially among young children.

TylerE 3y ago
Not a study, a review. Also doesn't claim what people like you says it claims. Also, look at the history. Date of the original review is 2007. You know what didn't exist in 2007?
- zdragnar 3y ago
  > You know what didn't exist in 2007? Airborne viruses?
- gadders 3y ago
  >>Not a study, a review. It's a meta-analysis of other trials. >>Also doesn't claim what people like you says it claims. By people like me, you mean people who believe in science? This is what it claims: "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence)." >>Also, look at the history. Date of the original review is 2007. You know what didn't exist in 2007? It has been updated several times. The latest edition was published in January 2023. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
bsder 3y ago
> However, at the population level there is no evidence that masking confers any benefit in preventing the spread of COVID. 1) Several studies from India seem to contradict this and barely had enough statistical power to be useful. 2) The fact that we can't generate a masking study with sufficient statistical power does NOT disprove the hypothesis--either direction. Citing your source: "The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions." This one REALLY grinds my gears. "Well the study said that masks don't work". No, it fucking didn't. It said they couldn't prove they worked given the data and quality of data they had. And the data was lousy as adherence by the general population was terrible. Things can work and still not be provable--especially when the experiment involves human beings since morally we can't just create two groups and infect one. Here's your counterexample: take a look at what hospitals are still doing when handling Covid patients. Hospitals get to collect data and enforce adherence. They absolutely do not want to transfer Covid between patients. And they do not want to transfer Covid to their staff as that throws things into disarray. Whatever they're doing seems to be working. I had a stint in the hospital recently, and they had several Covid patients on my floor--they weren't isolated to a specific wing or anything anymore. The hospital managed to not give Covid to me, so something they are doing is working. So, what that suggests is that procedures and masks work just fine. What seems to be problematic is lack of adherence to said procedures and masks. Basically, what all of these studies manage to prove is that the general population has enough non-compliant dipshits that active interventions don't work at the population level. Consequenctly, vaccines and other passive interventions that take into account the stupidity of the general population are required.

lawlessone 3y ago

I know this is well known but still worth mentioning again I think. That the "regular" facemasks were primarily so asymptomatic people with covid would spread it less. 100% protection was never possible but anything to delay to spread so that not everybody was sick at the same time was necessary.

zer00eyz 3y ago
Yes, I think the global "everyone put on a mask" moment highlighted some large cultural differences. My Asian friends understood that "not sharing germs" was as important as "not getting sick" mask compliance as much about being kind to others as to yourself. It also helps that lots of them were already socially accepting of masks due to climate, pollution and weather (or what ever you want to call dust out of Mongolia every year). I think that there is an interesting corollary with PPE culture in general, one that has changed in my life time (safety glasses and seat belts). I think we saw a lot of that same behavior bleed out to normal people (who don't wear PPE at a day job) in action. All in all there is a cultural aspects at play that are worth looking at.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]