UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Film Reviews, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found
It is a difficult tolerance in these times and best just to give none mask wearers a wider berth than usual.
Exemptions include
England
"In England, the UK Government lists the following factors as legitimate circumstances not to wear a covering:
young children under the age of 11
not being able to put on, wear or remove a face covering because of a physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability
if putting on, wearing or removing a face covering will cause you severe distress
if you are travelling with or providing assistance to someone who relies on lip reading to communicate
to avoid harm or injury, or the risk of harm or injury, to yourself or others
to avoid injury, or to escape a risk of harm, and you do not have a face covering with you
to eat or drink, but only if you need to
to take medication
if a police officer or other official requests you remove your face covering
Additionally, it includes situations where it is appropriate to remove your mask while in a location where their use is usually mandatory:
If asked to do so by shop staff for the purpose of age identification
If speaking with people who rely on lip reading, facial expressions and clear sound. Some may ask you, either verbally or in writing, to remove a covering to help with communication."
I don't think I'm alone in feeling frustrated in the amount of people wandering around Supermarkets without masks.
I know there are exemptions for those with respiratory difficulties but I'm not convinced there needs to be such an exemption.
I consulted with a couple of friends on this - one has a quite severe COPD condition, the other has asthma treated with an inhaler.
We all reached the same conclusion, that being - if you can walk to the entrance and then around the store you're fit enough to wear a light mask.
If the supermarket staff aren’t wearing a mask (which is meant to be mandatory, unless they’re behind a perspex screen), there’s little chance of them enforcing it on shoppers. I usually do my shop after work in the early hours at Tesco while the shelves are getting replenished. Last Friday I didn’t see one of these workers wearing a mask.
If the supermarket staff aren’t wearing a mask (which is meant to be mandatory, unless they’re behind a perspex screen), there’s little chance of them enforcing it on shoppers. I usually do my shop after work in the early hours at Tesco while the shelves are getting replenished. Last Friday I didn’t see one of these workers wearing a mask.
And no sooner had I written the above post, I came across this article on SKY. Scary!
COVID-19: Supermarkets most common exposure setting for coronavirus in England, latest data suggests http://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-s...shows-12136418
Clearly some people have valid reasons for not wearing them but the belligerent "I have a valid reason, but you can't ask me what it is and I don't have to tell you" brigade are clearly taking the pee. Usually covid deniers and conspiracy theorists who haven't actually got the balls to say "I refuse to wear one".
Clearly some people have valid reasons for not wearing them but the belligerent "I have a valid reason, but you can't ask me what it is and I don't have to tell you" brigade are clearly taking the pee. Usually covid deniers and conspiracy theorists who haven't actually got the balls to say "I refuse to wear one".
It is not 'having the balls' to say I refuse to wear one. The fact that they are not wearing a mask and not following the masses - is an indication to the fact that anyone confronting them would get a real mouthful. Those who are not wearing one for a valid reason should not be confronted, their health issues are personal and none of anyone else's business. Those who do not wear a mask otherwise, are fully aware of the behaviour of viruses, and the ineffectual practices you are being asked to follow.
Without you getting angsty - I am merely putting over a different view, and you need to step back a moment and think calmly, then argue your points of view if you disagree.
I have given you scientific evidence below on the wearing of masks. National Geographic published an article on 'Sneezing' or coughing. The articles are submitted by scientists. One needs to be at least 20 metres away from the person sneezing to avoid contamination!
Enviropedia: Air around you does not move in a direct line, it will rise and fall and move in spirals. A door opening or closing will cause a shift in the direction of air. Air conditioning in a closed shop environment will cause all air to move around the whole environment.
Movement of Air
Movement of air is caused by temperature or pressure differences and is eperienced as wind. Where there are differences of pressure between two places, a pressure gradient exists, across which air moves: from the high-pressure region to the low-pressure region. This movement of air however, does not follow the quickest straight-line path. In fact, the air moving from high to low pressure follows a spiralling route, outwards from high pressure and inwards towards low pressure.
You have on one side what the television, government specialists and the media tell you. On the other side you have what scientists say. You have heard the former repeat instructions over and over again - and here is a brief out line of a genuine scientific report:
"Abstract:
Various types of face masks available to the generalpublic are worn for protection against inhalation of dust,pollutants, allergens, and pathogenic organisms. Recentnews stories have illustrated the widespread use of facemasks for protection against Swine flu (H1N1), SevereAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (SARS), HighlyPathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus outbreaks inAsia, and dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center. However, the level of protection provided by facemasks is unknown. The objective of this study was todetermine how efficiently face masks prevent respiratoryexposure to potentially harmful aerosols. Three types ofcommonly available face masks were tested: a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped dust mask, and a bandana. An N95respirator was tested as the positive control.
Conclusions:
Three commonly available face masks—a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped mask, and a bandana—were challenged with saline aerosols in concentrations and particle size distributions representing dust storm conditionsto determine their protective efficiencies. A N95 respirator was used as the positive control and challenged under the same conditions. All three masks performedpoorly, with protective efficiencies less than 34% ascompared to the N95 respirator that had a protectiveefficiency of nearly 90%. Possible factors related to theprotective efficiencies observed with face masks and theN95 respirator includes the penetration efficiency andparticle load characteristics of the fabrication materials.Equally important is the fit of the face mask and respirator. This may account for the less than 95% efficiencyobserved for the N95. Protection from dust, allergens, and infectious aerosols with face masks and respirators is dependent onthe aerosol concentration of the compound and the infectious or inhaled dose. The results demonstrate thatuse of these types of face masks may not provide asmuch protection as desired against inhaled aerosols. (i.e. coughs and sneezes)
References: Adams, W. C. (1993). Measurement of breathing rate and volume in routinely performed daily activities. Final report. California Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency: Contract No. A033-205.Chan, Y. C., Mctainsh, G., Leys, J., Mcgowan, H., & Tews, K.(2002). Modeling of the air quality in three Australian citiesduring the 23 October 2002 dust storm. Available at: http://www.dar.csiro.au/pollution/an...s.pdfElimelech, M., Gregory, J., Jia, X., & Williams, R. (1998). Particledeposition & aggregation: Measurement, modelling andsimulation (p. 355). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.Hinds, W. C. (1982). Aerosol technology: Properties, behavior,and measurement of airborne particles (pp. 9-10). Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley and Sons.McClellan, R. O., & Henderson, R. F. (1989). Concepts in inhalation toxicology (p. 107). New York: Hemisphere PublishingCompany.Miller, R. W. (1983). Flow measurement engineering handbook(pp. 9-10-9-11). Kingsport, TN: The Kingsport Press.Selinus, O., & Alloway, B. J. (2005). Essentials of medical geology: Impacts of the natural environment of public health (p.473). Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press.3M Technical Data Bulletin #174 (2004). Respiratory protection against biohazards (p. 3). St. Paul, MN: 3M.
If you can breathe air through your mask - you can breathe in a virus - air molecules are many times greater the size of any virus. Manufacturers of PPe publish on their advertising that the masks are not suitable to prevent anything smaller than 0.6 um - but a virus is a thousand times smaller than that.
VIRUSES
Viruses are the smallest of all the microbes. They are said to be so small that 500 million rhinoviruses (which cause the common cold) could fit on to the head of a pin. Microbilogy Society
Does anything I have written above seem like just a theory? If it does I apologise and you have every reason tothink as you do
It is not 'having the balls' to say I refuse to wear one. The fact that they are not wearing a mask and not following the masses - is an indication to the fact that anyone confronting them would get a real mouthful. Those who are not wearing one for a valid reason should not be confronted, their health issues are personal and none of anyone else's business. Those who do not wear a mask otherwise, are fully aware of the behaviour of viruses, and the ineffectual practices you are being asked to follow.
Without you getting angsty - I am merely putting over a different view, and you need to step back a moment and think calmly, then argue your points of view if you disagree.
I have given you scientific evidence below on the wearing of masks. National Geographic published an article on 'Sneezing' or coughing. The articles are submitted by scientists. One needs to be at least 20 metres away from the person sneezing to avoid contamination!
Enviropedia: Air around you does not move in a direct line, it will rise and fall and move in spirals. A door opening or closing will cause a shift in the direction of air. Air conditioning in a closed shop environment will cause all air to move around the whole environment.
Movement of Air
Movement of air is caused by temperature or pressure differences and is eperienced as wind. Where there are differences of pressure between two places, a pressure gradient exists, across which air moves: from the high-pressure region to the low-pressure region. This movement of air however, does not follow the quickest straight-line path. In fact, the air moving from high to low pressure follows a spiralling route, outwards from high pressure and inwards towards low pressure.
You have on one side what the television, government specialists and the media tell you. On the other side you have what scientists say. You have heard the former repeat instructions over and over again - and here is a brief out line of a genuine scientific report:
"Abstract:
Various types of face masks available to the generalpublic are worn for protection against inhalation of dust,pollutants, allergens, and pathogenic organisms. Recentnews stories have illustrated the widespread use of facemasks for protection against Swine flu (H1N1), SevereAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (SARS), HighlyPathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus outbreaks inAsia, and dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center. However, the level of protection provided by facemasks is unknown. The objective of this study was todetermine how efficiently face masks prevent respiratoryexposure to potentially harmful aerosols. Three types ofcommonly available face masks were tested: a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped dust mask, and a bandana. An N95respirator was tested as the positive control.
Conclusions:
Three commonly available face masks—a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped mask, and a bandana—were challenged with saline aerosols in concentrations and particle size distributions representing dust storm conditionsto determine their protective efficiencies. A N95 respirator was used as the positive control and challenged under the same conditions. All three masks performedpoorly, with protective efficiencies less than 34% ascompared to the N95 respirator that had a protectiveefficiency of nearly 90%. Possible factors related to theprotective efficiencies observed with face masks and theN95 respirator includes the penetration efficiency andparticle load characteristics of the fabrication materials.Equally important is the fit of the face mask and respirator. This may account for the less than 95% efficiencyobserved for the N95. Protection from dust, allergens, and infectious aerosols with face masks and respirators is dependent onthe aerosol concentration of the compound and the infectious or inhaled dose. The results demonstrate thatuse of these types of face masks may not provide asmuch protection as desired against inhaled aerosols. (i.e. coughs and sneezes)
References: Adams, W. C. (1993). Measurement of breathing rate and volume in routinely performed daily activities. Final report. California Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency: Contract No. A033-205.Chan, Y. C., Mctainsh, G., Leys, J., Mcgowan, H., & Tews, K.(2002). Modeling of the air quality in three Australian citiesduring the 23 October 2002 dust storm. Available at: http://www.dar.csiro.au/pollution/an...s.pdfElimelech, M., Gregory, J., Jia, X., & Williams, R. (1998). Particledeposition & aggregation: Measurement, modelling andsimulation (p. 355). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.Hinds, W. C. (1982). Aerosol technology: Properties, behavior,and measurement of airborne particles (pp. 9-10). Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley and Sons.McClellan, R. O., & Henderson, R. F. (1989). Concepts in inhalation toxicology (p. 107). New York: Hemisphere PublishingCompany.Miller, R. W. (1983). Flow measurement engineering handbook(pp. 9-10-9-11). Kingsport, TN: The Kingsport Press.Selinus, O., & Alloway, B. J. (2005). Essentials of medical geology: Impacts of the natural environment of public health (p.473). Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press.3M Technical Data Bulletin #174 (2004). Respiratory protection against biohazards (p. 3). St. Paul, MN: 3M.
If you can breathe air through your mask - you can breathe in a virus - air molecules are many times greater the size of any virus. Manufacturers of PPe publish on their advertising that the masks are not suitable to prevent anything smaller than 0.6 um - but a virus is a thousand times smaller than that.
VIRUSES
Viruses are the smallest of all the microbes. They are said to be so small that 500 million rhinoviruses (which cause the common cold) could fit on to the head of a pin. Microbilogy Society
Does anything I have written above seem like just a theory? If it does I apologise and you have every reason tothink as you do
I am happy to repeat the evidence of the efficacy of mask-wearing published in the peer-reviewed nature magazine.
The one most obvious point you overlook is we find it very hard to spit, sneeze and generally propel our potentially virus-carrying breath towards you at the very least whilst wearing a mask.
That is beyond question.
It is not YOUR business it is very much OUR business.
Why you find this hard to understand I don't know
The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough
I would have thought that if you have some sort of respiratory condition that it would be all the more reason to wear a mask. Not to be exempt from wearing one.
Some 'interesting' posts and I stand by my initial statement - if you are fit enough to walk into and around the store, then you are fit enough to wear a face covering.
If the wearing of a close fitting 'mask' is genuinely not possible then there is always the 'visor' type as an option. The visor type could be worn by anyone, even if they're trailing an oxygen bottle behind them.
There really is no excuse other than people behaving selfishly or trying to be billy big balls.
The issue should be a 'zero tolerance' matter and no face covering - no entrance.
The supermarket companies have creamed massive profits from the public over the years so there is no reason why they can't provide adequate levels of security staff at the shop door.
There is an army of door staff out there, who aren't working, sitting at home kicking their heels, who'd love to be working.
It is not 'having the balls' to say I refuse to wear one. The fact that they are not wearing a mask and not following the masses - is an indication to the fact that anyone confronting them would get a real mouthful. Those who are not wearing one for a valid reason should not be confronted, their health issues are personal and none of anyone else's business. Those who do not wear a mask otherwise, are fully aware of the behaviour of viruses, and the ineffectual practices you are being asked to follow.
Without you getting angsty - I am merely putting over a different view, and you need to step back a moment and think calmly, then argue your points of view if you disagree.
I have given you scientific evidence below on the wearing of masks. National Geographic published an article on 'Sneezing' or coughing. The articles are submitted by scientists. One needs to be at least 20 metres away from the person sneezing to avoid contamination!
Enviropedia: Air around you does not move in a direct line, it will rise and fall and move in spirals. A door opening or closing will cause a shift in the direction of air. Air conditioning in a closed shop environment will cause all air to move around the whole environment.
Movement of Air
Movement of air is caused by temperature or pressure differences and is eperienced as wind. Where there are differences of pressure between two places, a pressure gradient exists, across which air moves: from the high-pressure region to the low-pressure region. This movement of air however, does not follow the quickest straight-line path. In fact, the air moving from high to low pressure follows a spiralling route, outwards from high pressure and inwards towards low pressure.
You have on one side what the television, government specialists and the media tell you. On the other side you have what scientists say. You have heard the former repeat instructions over and over again - and here is a brief out line of a genuine scientific report:
"Abstract:
Various types of face masks available to the generalpublic are worn for protection against inhalation of dust,pollutants, allergens, and pathogenic organisms. Recentnews stories have illustrated the widespread use of facemasks for protection against Swine flu (H1N1), SevereAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (SARS), HighlyPathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus outbreaks inAsia, and dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center. However, the level of protection provided by facemasks is unknown. The objective of this study was todetermine how efficiently face masks prevent respiratoryexposure to potentially harmful aerosols. Three types ofcommonly available face masks were tested: a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped dust mask, and a bandana. An N95respirator was tested as the positive control.
Conclusions:
Three commonly available face masks—a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped mask, and a bandana—were challenged with saline aerosols in concentrations and particle size distributions representing dust storm conditionsto determine their protective efficiencies. A N95 respirator was used as the positive control and challenged under the same conditions. All three masks performedpoorly, with protective efficiencies less than 34% ascompared to the N95 respirator that had a protectiveefficiency of nearly 90%. Possible factors related to theprotective efficiencies observed with face masks and theN95 respirator includes the penetration efficiency andparticle load characteristics of the fabrication materials.Equally important is the fit of the face mask and respirator. This may account for the less than 95% efficiencyobserved for the N95. Protection from dust, allergens, and infectious aerosols with face masks and respirators is dependent onthe aerosol concentration of the compound and the infectious or inhaled dose. The results demonstrate thatuse of these types of face masks may not provide asmuch protection as desired against inhaled aerosols. (i.e. coughs and sneezes)
References: Adams, W. C. (1993). Measurement of breathing rate and volume in routinely performed daily activities. Final report. California Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency: Contract No. A033-205.Chan, Y. C., Mctainsh, G., Leys, J., Mcgowan, H., & Tews, K.(2002). Modeling of the air quality in three Australian citiesduring the 23 October 2002 dust storm. Available at: www.dar.csiro.au/pollution/andrewchanics.pdfElimelech, M., Gregory, J., Jia, X., & Williams, R. (1998). Particledeposition & aggregation: Measurement, modelling andsimulation (p. 355). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.Hinds, W. C. (1982). Aerosol technology: Properties, behavior,and measurement of airborne particles (pp. 9-10). Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley and Sons.McClellan, R. O., & Henderson, R. F. (1989). Concepts in inhalation toxicology (p. 107). New York: Hemisphere PublishingCompany.Miller, R. W. (1983). Flow measurement engineering handbook(pp. 9-10-9-11). Kingsport, TN: The Kingsport Press.Selinus, O., & Alloway, B. J. (2005). Essentials of medical geology: Impacts of the natural environment of public health (p.473). Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press.3M Technical Data Bulletin #174 (2004). Respiratory protection against biohazards (p. 3). St. Paul, MN: 3M.
If you can breathe air through your mask - you can breathe in a virus - air molecules are many times greater the size of any virus. Manufacturers of PPe publish on their advertising that the masks are not suitable to prevent anything smaller than 0.6 um - but a virus is a thousand times smaller than that.
VIRUSES
Viruses are the smallest of all the microbes. They are said to be so small that 500 million rhinoviruses (which cause the common cold) could fit on to the head of a pin. Microbilogy Society
Does anything I have written above seem like just a theory? If it does I apologise and you have every reason tothink as you do
You put a GCSE length composition about wearing a mask yet one of you doesn't know everything about Martin Mere
I would have thought that if you have some sort of respiratory condition that it would be all the more reason to wear a mask. Not to be exempt from wearing one.
It is not 'having the balls' to say I refuse to wear one. The fact that they are not wearing a mask and not following the masses - is an indication to the fact that anyone confronting them would get a real mouthful. Those who are not wearing one for a valid reason should not be confronted, their health issues are personal and none of anyone else's business. Those who do not wear a mask otherwise, are fully aware of the behaviour of viruses, and the ineffectual practices you are being asked to follow.
Without you getting angsty - I am merely putting over a different view, and you need to step back a moment and think calmly, then argue your points of view if you disagree.
I have given you scientific evidence below on the wearing of masks. National Geographic published an article on 'Sneezing' or coughing. The articles are submitted by scientists. One needs to be at least 20 metres away from the person sneezing to avoid contamination!
Enviropedia: Air around you does not move in a direct line, it will rise and fall and move in spirals. A door opening or closing will cause a shift in the direction of air. Air conditioning in a closed shop environment will cause all air to move around the whole environment.
Movement of Air
Movement of air is caused by temperature or pressure differences and is eperienced as wind. Where there are differences of pressure between two places, a pressure gradient exists, across which air moves: from the high-pressure region to the low-pressure region. This movement of air however, does not follow the quickest straight-line path. In fact, the air moving from high to low pressure follows a spiralling route, outwards from high pressure and inwards towards low pressure.
You have on one side what the television, government specialists and the media tell you. On the other side you have what scientists say. You have heard the former repeat instructions over and over again - and here is a brief out line of a genuine scientific report:
"Abstract:
Various types of face masks available to the generalpublic are worn for protection against inhalation of dust,pollutants, allergens, and pathogenic organisms. Recentnews stories have illustrated the widespread use of facemasks for protection against Swine flu (H1N1), SevereAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (SARS), HighlyPathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus outbreaks inAsia, and dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center. However, the level of protection provided by facemasks is unknown. The objective of this study was todetermine how efficiently face masks prevent respiratoryexposure to potentially harmful aerosols. Three types ofcommonly available face masks were tested: a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped dust mask, and a bandana. An N95respirator was tested as the positive control.
Conclusions:
Three commonly available face masks—a surgicalmask, a pre-shaped mask, and a bandana—were challenged with saline aerosols in concentrations and particle size distributions representing dust storm conditionsto determine their protective efficiencies. A N95 respirator was used as the positive control and challenged under the same conditions. All three masks performedpoorly, with protective efficiencies less than 34% ascompared to the N95 respirator that had a protectiveefficiency of nearly 90%. Possible factors related to theprotective efficiencies observed with face masks and theN95 respirator includes the penetration efficiency andparticle load characteristics of the fabrication materials.Equally important is the fit of the face mask and respirator. This may account for the less than 95% efficiencyobserved for the N95. Protection from dust, allergens, and infectious aerosols with face masks and respirators is dependent onthe aerosol concentration of the compound and the infectious or inhaled dose. The results demonstrate thatuse of these types of face masks may not provide asmuch protection as desired against inhaled aerosols. (i.e. coughs and sneezes)
References: Adams, W. C. (1993). Measurement of breathing rate and volume in routinely performed daily activities. Final report. California Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency: Contract No. A033-205.Chan, Y. C., Mctainsh, G., Leys, J., Mcgowan, H., & Tews, K.(2002). Modeling of the air quality in three Australian citiesduring the 23 October 2002 dust storm. Available at: http://www.dar.csiro.au/pollution/an...s.pdfElimelech, M., Gregory, J., Jia, X., & Williams, R. (1998). Particledeposition & aggregation: Measurement, modelling andsimulation (p. 355). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.Hinds, W. C. (1982). Aerosol technology: Properties, behavior,and measurement of airborne particles (pp. 9-10). Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley and Sons.McClellan, R. O., & Henderson, R. F. (1989). Concepts in inhalation toxicology (p. 107). New York: Hemisphere PublishingCompany.Miller, R. W. (1983). Flow measurement engineering handbook(pp. 9-10-9-11). Kingsport, TN: The Kingsport Press.Selinus, O., & Alloway, B. J. (2005). Essentials of medical geology: Impacts of the natural environment of public health (p.473). Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press.3M Technical Data Bulletin #174 (2004). Respiratory protection against biohazards (p. 3). St. Paul, MN: 3M.
If you can breathe air through your mask - you can breathe in a virus - air molecules are many times greater the size of any virus. Manufacturers of PPe publish on their advertising that the masks are not suitable to prevent anything smaller than 0.6 um - but a virus is a thousand times smaller than that.
VIRUSES
Viruses are the smallest of all the microbes. They are said to be so small that 500 million rhinoviruses (which cause the common cold) could fit on to the head of a pin. Microbilogy Society
Does anything I have written above seem like just a theory? If it does I apologise and you have every reason tothink as you do
Put simply :-
.
Never, ever, argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
It is not 'having the balls' to say I refuse to wear one. The fact that they are not wearing a mask and not following the masses - is an indication to the fact that anyone confronting them would get a real mouthful. Those who are not wearing one for a valid reason should not be confronted, their health issues are personal and none of anyone else's business. Those who do not wear a mask otherwise, are fully aware of the behaviour of viruses, and the ineffectual practices you are being asked to follow. etc, etc.
You and your ignorant spoutings are very much part of the problem, we all know that masks alone will not protect the wearer completely by any means, but there is no doubt that a mask will diminish anything coming from the wearer, no matter what, the virus hasn’t got legs or wings it is carried on the emissions from the carrier, anything which captures or reduces those emissions is obviously of value.
I would have thought that if you have some sort of respiratory condition that it would be all the more reason to wear a mask. Not to be exempt from wearing one.
Yes I ALWAYS thought that also, pretty blooming obvious , masks are pretty useless really but better than nothing, those that refuse to wear them on medical grounds are their own worse enemy, looking for confrontation and a bit thick.
If you have COPD or breathing difficulties and you end up in a covid ward you will be ok until it gets busy and full on the ward and they need that ventilator for someone who has a better chance, they are just going to turn you off .
So if you are problematic already instead of crying wah wah I can’t wear a mask get it into your thick head this could finish you.
Enviropedia: Air around you does not move in a direct line, it will rise and fall and move in spirals. A door opening or closing will cause a shift in the direction of air. Air conditioning in a closed shop environment will cause all air to move around the whole environment.
Movement of Air
Movement of air is caused by temperature or pressure differences and is eperienced as wind. Where there are differences of pressure between two places, a pressure gradient exists, across which air moves: from the high-pressure region to the low-pressure region. This movement of air however, does not follow the quickest straight-line path. In fact, the air moving from high to low pressure follows a spiralling route, outwards from high pressure and inwards towards low pressure.
If you can breathe air through your mask - you can breathe in a virus - air molecules are many times greater the size of any virus. Manufacturers of PPe publish on their advertising that the masks are not suitable to prevent anything smaller than 0.6 um - but a virus is a thousand times smaller than that.
VIRUSES
Viruses are the smallest of all the microbes. They are said to be so small that 500 million rhinoviruses (which cause the common cold) could fit on to the head of a pin. Microbilogy Society
Does anything I have written above seem like just a theory? If it does I apologise and you have every reason tothink as you do
I won't quote the whole of said's post for the umpteenth time, just the bits that show that he/she/they are working on a false premise.
The virus is not floating around in the air like pollen or dust. If it was, the infection and death rates would be considerably higher than they are. It only becomes 'airborne' when it is propelled by the force of a cough or a sneeze, just like a bullet could be said to be 'airborne'.
When propelled by a cough or a sneeze, the virus is encased in a droplet of mucus, making it considerably larger. Whilst not totally effective, this makes wearing a mask a safer option than not wearing one, because it will block or absorb some of the droplets. Even if some get through, you will receive a smaller 'dose' of the virus than you would if you weren't wearing a mask. This is relevant because the scientific advice says that you need to be in close proximity to an infected person for around 15 minutes to become infected. This is why venues where people are seated together for an hour or two are closed.
So, I hope that any further posts by 'said' on this subject are based on the correct factual information that the virus is not 'airborne' like dust, and when propelled by a sneeze or cough it is considerably larger than in its natural state.
Last edited by Lamparilla; 20/11/2020 at 12:28 PM.
Reason: typo
UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Vouchers, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found