By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
It won't 100% stop Covid-19, but it will inhibit the spread of the virus. All pushing in the right direction.
Yes, some of the droplets may be smaller than the holes in the fabric of a mask, but not by much. Someone posted on here an interview with a US epidemiologist who likened it to several American footballers trying to run through a doorway at once. Also, droplets cannot steer themselves through gaps.
So I usually wear one when going into public spaces like shops.
I would wear one but it will feel like suffocating . I have mild asthma and allergies and a blockage in my nose that cannot be sorted out. I try to just keep my distance and use hand gel and wipes and don;t go out much.
1
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 13:34 - May 16 with 1082 views
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 13:12 - May 16 by Guthrum
I prefer the Tesco slogan - every little helps.
It won't 100% stop Covid-19, but it will inhibit the spread of the virus. All pushing in the right direction.
Yes, some of the droplets may be smaller than the holes in the fabric of a mask, but not by much. Someone posted on here an interview with a US epidemiologist who likened it to several American footballers trying to run through a doorway at once. Also, droplets cannot steer themselves through gaps.
So I usually wear one when going into public spaces like shops.
I've started to wear one whilst shopping because I think moving forward they may become compulsory and I want to get used to them.
What I did notice three or so weeks ago when they started to become more prevalent was that the people wearing them were the ones who went charging up the aisle in Tesco in the opposite direction to the arrows and lean over you to grab a yogurt instead of waiting for more space.
It's as if the wearers felt a sense of invincibility and fcuk everyone else.
Useful if a) worn correctly and b) in enclosed spaces c) only for the duration they're good for and not reused. A paper 'surgical' mask is good for about 2 hours' intensive use, FFP3 or equivalent 4.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 13:34 - May 16 by GlasgowBlue
I've started to wear one whilst shopping because I think moving forward they may become compulsory and I want to get used to them.
What I did notice three or so weeks ago when they started to become more prevalent was that the people wearing them were the ones who went charging up the aisle in Tesco in the opposite direction to the arrows and lean over you to grab a yogurt instead of waiting for more space.
It's as if the wearers felt a sense of invincibility and fcuk everyone else.
That's the main reason I'm sceptical about rolling them out for the general public, given how well they've been exercising their Common Sense this week.
Evidence suggests that masks+distancing *can* reduce risk, but with the caveat you've mentioned there and what I've said in reply to the OP as well.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 13:34 - May 16 by GlasgowBlue
I've started to wear one whilst shopping because I think moving forward they may become compulsory and I want to get used to them.
What I did notice three or so weeks ago when they started to become more prevalent was that the people wearing them were the ones who went charging up the aisle in Tesco in the opposite direction to the arrows and lean over you to grab a yogurt instead of waiting for more space.
It's as if the wearers felt a sense of invincibility and fcuk everyone else.
Absolutely this.....fekkin mask w@nkers!
Edit...we buff wearers are a much more considerate breed!
[Post edited 16 May 2020 13:52]
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 13:35 - May 16 by BlueBadger
Useful if a) worn correctly and b) in enclosed spaces c) only for the duration they're good for and not reused. A paper 'surgical' mask is good for about 2 hours' intensive use, FFP3 or equivalent 4.
And they're strictly 'once only' as well.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 14:04 - May 16 by BanksterDebtSlave
Zombers just thought you should know I had granola for breakfast today. Ate it in the Range Rover listening to the CD you recommended! ;)
Now feel contrite, I actually had granola yesterday morning...by the way, wearing a face mask and going about in the buff are not mutually exclusive. You could wear nothing but a face mask, and I reckon you would have every aisle in the supermarket to yourself as well.
I tried one when visiting GP surgery for routine blood test 2 weeks ago - it was actually a gardeners' face mask for dust, bought off a gardening site as an afterthought when checking out my trolleyfull of other stuff. The nurse said it was still better than her official PPE mask!
First thing specs wearers will notice is that it very quickly steams up your glasses so that you can't see ... We thought that for spec-wearing medics (she doesn't wear them) this must be a massive issue.
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 13:12 - May 16 by Guthrum
I prefer the Tesco slogan - every little helps.
It won't 100% stop Covid-19, but it will inhibit the spread of the virus. All pushing in the right direction.
Yes, some of the droplets may be smaller than the holes in the fabric of a mask, but not by much. Someone posted on here an interview with a US epidemiologist who likened it to several American footballers trying to run through a doorway at once. Also, droplets cannot steer themselves through gaps.
So I usually wear one when going into public spaces like shops.
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 14:44 - May 16 by Ryorry
I tried one when visiting GP surgery for routine blood test 2 weeks ago - it was actually a gardeners' face mask for dust, bought off a gardening site as an afterthought when checking out my trolleyfull of other stuff. The nurse said it was still better than her official PPE mask!
First thing specs wearers will notice is that it very quickly steams up your glasses so that you can't see ... We thought that for spec-wearing medics (she doesn't wear them) this must be a massive issue.
As a glasses wearer, they make backs of your ears pretty sore come the end of the day.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Just to explain the Pascal's wager reference; think of the simplest of matrix arrangements - two rows (believe in God, don't believe in God) and two columns (God exists, God does not exist). For face masks the rows are: I will wear a face mask, I won't wear a face mask. The columns are: Face masks are effective, Face masks are not effective.
The simple interpretation of Pascal's wager is that if you believe in God and God exists then you are a winner and get eternal life (a maximum score in Game Theory). The next best two outcomes are that you do not believe in God and God does not exists (so you do not waste any time and effort in a fruitless pursuit) or you do not believe but you say you do (so get on better with believers and perhaps get put in purgatory for a while when you die). The losing option is to believe but openly deny the existence of God, then you die and find that you were right about God's existence and that God is not happy with you.
No one has yet chosen the Game Theory winning option of face masks yet, to regard them as beneficial and to require all to wear them. To be honest I am in the 'if it males those around you feel better then I will' camp, this is roughly the same value as 'they don't work so I am not going to bother' in terms of effort and public perception. One TWTD contributor has opted for the losing 'they work, I'm not going to wear one'!
Face masks? Along the lines of Pascal's wager on 09:28 - May 17 by WeWereZombies
Just to explain the Pascal's wager reference; think of the simplest of matrix arrangements - two rows (believe in God, don't believe in God) and two columns (God exists, God does not exist). For face masks the rows are: I will wear a face mask, I won't wear a face mask. The columns are: Face masks are effective, Face masks are not effective.
The simple interpretation of Pascal's wager is that if you believe in God and God exists then you are a winner and get eternal life (a maximum score in Game Theory). The next best two outcomes are that you do not believe in God and God does not exists (so you do not waste any time and effort in a fruitless pursuit) or you do not believe but you say you do (so get on better with believers and perhaps get put in purgatory for a while when you die). The losing option is to believe but openly deny the existence of God, then you die and find that you were right about God's existence and that God is not happy with you.
No one has yet chosen the Game Theory winning option of face masks yet, to regard them as beneficial and to require all to wear them. To be honest I am in the 'if it males those around you feel better then I will' camp, this is roughly the same value as 'they don't work so I am not going to bother' in terms of effort and public perception. One TWTD contributor has opted for the losing 'they work, I'm not going to wear one'!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
