Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

It's a face mask, not a neck mask

Journal by Zinnia Zirconium

Found in a letter to the Elko Daily Free Press (Elko, Nevada):

Letter: It's a face mask, not a neck mask

Jun 30, 2020

Editor:

Yesterday I visited two local businesses. The first had four women working and all had face masks on around their neck, not on their face. The second business had three women working and not a face mask in sight.

Maybe I am wrong but I thought we all had to wear a mask in public or maybe some people are above that.

Steve Hulet

Spring Creek

I wear a face mask in public, on my face. I see people wearing masks around their necks, and I don't appreciate this disturbingly common practice. If they're not going to be serious about wearing masks, I'd rather see people not wearing masks at all. Neck mask is not an effective compromise.

It's a face mask, not a neck mask | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 116 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Reply to Comment Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 06 2020, @04:20PM (4 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 06 2020, @04:20PM (#1017118) Journal

    https://technocracy.news/blaylock-face-masks-pose-serious-risks-to-the-healthy/ [technocracy.news]

    Dr. Russell Blaylock warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask.

    As businesses reopen, many are requiring shoppers and employees to wear a face mask. Costco, for instance, will not allow shoppers into the store without wearing a face mask. Many employers are requiring all employees to wear a face mask while at work. In some jurisdictions, all citizens must wear a face mask if they are outside of their own home. ⁃ TN Editor

    If Blaylock were the only doctor in the world who was saying that, I'd probably decide he was full of himself. But, he's not the only one.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2020, @05:52PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2020, @05:52PM (#1017191)

    Bullshit.

    Most of the masks being worn aren't N95 masks. They allow for more airflow and have greater similarity to surgical masks. The article claims that surgical masks cause hypoxia, citing this paper [isciii.es]. But the conclusion of the paper states:

    Thus it is hard to believe that these masks serve as a reducer of oxygen uptake, but they may be acting as a psychological restriction over spontaneous breathing of the active surgeon.

    Considering our findings, this is the first clinical investigation reporting a decrease in blood O2 saturation and an increase in pulse rates of the surgeons after the operations due to surgical mask usage. This change in SpO2 may be either due to the facial mask or the operational stress, since similar changes were observed in the group performing surgery without a mask. However, it cannot be decided whether stress plays any role on the late changes, namely pulse rate increase and SpO2 level decrease; since surgeons are not allowed to perform major surgery without a facial mask in most institutions.

    Your article is intellectually dishonest in regard to the value of masks to prevent the spread of influenza. It references this paper [nih.gov] and quotes the following:

    None of the studies we reviewed established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.

    And then it proceeds to omit the relevant text that immediately follows:

    Some useful clues, however, could be gleaned. Subanalyses performed for one of the larger randomised controlled studies in a household setting found evidence of reduced rates of influenza‐like illness if household contacts consistently wore the mask or respirator. The authors of a randomised trial of mask plus alcohol‐based sanitiser and mask‐only group amongst U.S. university students living in residence halls noted that their study may have been better positioned to identify a protective effect because participants initiated the interventions at the beginning of the influenza season. Cowling’s finding that there was a significant reduction in the secondary attack ratio if the hand hygiene and mask plus hand hygiene interventions were begun within 36 hours of the index case lends support to this hypothesis.

    Funny how any conjecture supporting the value of masks was conveniently omitted. Your link then goes on to claim that no study has established that masks prevent the spread of COVID-19. It was posted on May 11.

    However, a study [nih.gov] about this was published on April 30. I'll quote the following conclusion:

    In summary, there is a growing body of evidence supporting all three indications for respiratory protection – community, healthcare workers and sick patients (source control). The largest number of randomised controlled trials have been done for community use of masks by well people in high-transmission settings such as household or college settings. There is benefit in the community if used early, with hand hygiene and if compliant.

    The use of masks by sick people, despite being the WHO's only recommendation for mask use by community members during COVID-19 pandemic, is supported by the smallest body of evidence. Source control is probably a sensible recommendation given the suggestion of protection and given specific data on coronaviruses showing protection (Leung et al., 2020). It may help if visitors and febrile patients wear a mask in the healthcare setting, whether in primary care or hospitals. Universal face mask use is likely to have the most impact on epidemic growth in the community, given the high risk of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission (He et al., 2020).

    He et al. (2020) is about the role of presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission. But Leung et al. (2020) [nature.com] is another paper about the use of masks to control the spread of viruses, and states:

    We also demonstrated the efficacy of surgical masks to reduce coronavirus detection and viral copies in large respiratory droplets and in aerosols (Table 1b). This has important implications for control of COVID-19, suggesting that surgical face masks could be used by ill people to reduce onward transmission.

    So, Runaway, would you care to retract the bullshit you've been posting about masks?

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 06 2020, @08:20PM (2 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 06 2020, @08:20PM (#1017289) Journal

      So, Runaway, would you care to retract the bullshit you've been posting about masks?

      Nope.

      https://technocracy.news/blaylock-face-masks-pose-serious-risks-to-the-healthy/ [technocracy.news]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2020, @08:47PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2020, @08:47PM (#1017307)

        Sorry, Runaway, repeating lies won't cause them to become true. I debunked that article already. A significant portion of what's written there is just outright false. Linking to it again won't make it magically become true. I know you think you're a special snowflake and shouldn't have to wear a mask, but at least try harder than repeating the same bullshit I already debunked.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2020, @08:56PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2020, @08:56PM (#1017311)

        Also, just to be clear, technocracy.news is a fake news site [newsguardtech.com] and has received sufficient notoriety for posting bullshit that even the BBC denounced it by name as a fake news site [bbc.com]. Linking to fake news doesn't make it true.