SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Home-made face masks likely need at least 2 layers to curb COVID-19 spread:
Home-made cloth face masks likely need a minimum of two layers, and preferably three, to prevent the dispersal of viral droplets from the nose and mouth that are associated with the spread of COVID-19, indicates a video case study published online in the journal Thorax.
[...] A team of Australian researchers therefore compared the effectiveness of single and double-layer cloth face coverings (175 g/m² cotton fabric, with a thread count of 170/ inch) with a 3-ply surgical face mask (Bao Thach) at reducing droplet spread.
[...] The video recording showed that the 3-ply surgical face mask was the most effective at reducing airborne droplet dispersal, although even a single layer cloth face covering reduced the droplet spread from speaking.
But a double layer covering was better than a single layer in reducing the droplet spread from coughing and sneezing, the recording showed.
This is just one case, added to which several other factors contribute to the effectiveness of cloth face masks, note the researchers. These include the type of material used, design and fit, as well as the frequency of washing.
Nevertheless, based on their observations, a home made cloth mask with at least two layers is preferable to a single layer mask, they say, adding: "Guidelines on home-made cloth masks should stipulate multiple layers."
And they emphasise: "There is a need for more evidence to inform safer cloth mask design, and countries should ensure adequate manufacturing or procurement of surgical masks."
Journal Reference:
Prateek Bahl, Shovon Bhattacharjee, Charitha de Silva, et al. Face coverings and mask to minimise droplet dispersion and aerosolisation: a video case study [$], Thorax (DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-215748)
(Score: 2) by Oakenshield on Tuesday July 28 2020, @01:31PM (7 children)
States and areas with the most restrictive lockdowns are mostly Democratic. Look at DC. It's a $1,000 fine if they catch you without your mask.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 28 2020, @02:49PM (6 children)
I live in NYC, which is about 5-1 Democratic and folks aren't being fined for not wearing masks. And all of NY state is in phase 4 of reopening, and isn't locked down at all [ny.gov].
In fact, that's not allowed [policeone.com].
You were just complaining about OH which is pretty much fully controlled by the Rs.
So what was it you were trying to say? Nothing useful or interesting, I guess.
(Score: 2) by Oakenshield on Tuesday July 28 2020, @06:40PM (5 children)
I could have just as easily said Michigan which has an almost identical order and is run by a Democrat.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 28 2020, @08:47PM (4 children)
And you could have said that all R controlled jurisdictions are completely COVID-19 free.
That would have been just as true as what you did say.
What was your point then? It's still not clear to me. Are you saying that the Coronavirus is a registered Democrat?
Or are you claiming that it doesn't exist at all? That it's just a 'dempanic' rather than a pandemic?
Do tell.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2020, @12:49AM (3 children)
I have no idea what kind of disjointed thought process could cobble together such a string of non-sequiturs. Let me spell it out for you since those you clearly cannot put two and two together. The public health orders are almost identical to down to the wording in Ohio and Michigan. Ohio has a Republican governor and Michigan has a Democrat. The list of requirements and exemptions for either state make no sense to anyone with more than half a brain.
I am not trying to invalidate mask orders or minimize Covid. I am pointing out the stupidity of being legally required to wear a mask for eight hours in a building occupied entirely by one person. This is not a Republican problem anymore than a Democrat problem. This is a stupidity problem which you clearly fail to recognize exists everywhere on the political spectrum. Perhaps being afflicted personally, you are blissfully unaware of its existence.
Too lazy to log in...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2020, @03:38AM (2 children)
You know, for someone who is agreeing with me, you're really obnoxious about it.
Non-sequiturs? Although you probably just didn't follow the thread, I'll channel you and assume you're stupid.
First, Oakenshield complains about Ohio [soylentnews.org]:
Later, Oakenshield then claims that [soylentnews.org]:
I then pointed out that wasn't true [soylentnews.org], using New York as an example, then wondered aloud why he focused on "D" places WRT restrictions, after complaining about Ohio, a solidly "R" state:
Oakenshield then says [soylentnews.org]:
Which got me to the comment to which you replied.
Are you following along so far? I wouldn't want you to get confused.
My point was that Oakenshield was talking out of both sides of his mouth. Complaining about Ohio's restrictions, then blaming Democrats for them. Since the truth is that it doesn't really matter which particular party may control local/state governments -- some have focused on the data to drive their decision making, and some have not.
As such, you are agreeing with me, though you don't seem to be bright enough to realize that.
More's the pity.
(Score: 2) by Oakenshield on Wednesday July 29 2020, @09:02PM (1 child)
I made no causal connection of the Ohio order to Democrats. That was just wholly conceived in your imagination. I did point out the the most restrictive orders DO COME from Democratic strongholds which is generally true. MSM has been harping on that fact for weeks as a success story with NYC as their favorite example.
My chief complaint is not in the Ohio order itself but the implementation of it. I thought I had made myself clear. Yes I am complaining about Ohio but in fact Michigan implemented a nearly identical order with the exact same flaws. That statement was to break the implied accusation that the Ohio order was a bad Republican plan created as an isolated event. That was in response to a comment that made the case that Ohio can't expect any better with a Republican governor:
Your comment that NYC residents are not being fined is also disingenuous. It looks like there is a statewide $1,000 fine for NYC citizens on the table currently and a fairly strict mask order as well. The fact that it is not being enforced is entirely irrelevant. I am also unlikely to be fined since there is nobody else in my workplace to turn me in.
Do you wear your mask when you shower at the gym after a workout? In Ohio (AND MICHIGAN) you would be required to wear one if following the letter of the law. If we copied NY fines, a maskless showering scofflaw could conceivably be on the hook for a grand if someone with a badge was having a bad day and took it out on them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2020, @09:15PM
If gyms were open in NY (which they're not, and a good thing too) I'd likely shower at home even without a pandemic.
Apparently, you're not familiar with the difference between De Jure and De Facto [wustl.edu]
And much of that has to do with adherence (or the lack thereof) to Wheaton's Law [knowyourmeme.com].
I haven't yet decided if you're just not very good at communicating in English (and no, I don't know what you're thinking unless you actually say it) or you're just a dickhead.
It's sad that it took four or five comments from you to mostly discern what you were trying to say. Work on it. I know you can do better.