Message from @Maw

Discord ID: 775442470426247230


2020-11-09 19:27:04 UTC  

By like, a huge margin.

2020-11-09 19:27:12 UTC  

Probably 96+%.

2020-11-09 19:27:19 UTC  

mask on? less particles in the air to breath. Less particles on surfaces to touch

2020-11-09 19:27:25 UTC  

masks off? not so much

2020-11-09 19:27:36 UTC  

Not entirely true, less large particles for sure.

2020-11-09 19:27:53 UTC  

less all particles

2020-11-09 19:28:03 UTC  

masks aren't tiny-particle _proof_

2020-11-09 19:28:09 UTC  

but they do reduce them AFAIK

2020-11-09 19:28:09 UTC  

The main vector is likely stuff that hangs in the air suspended for a long time though.

2020-11-09 19:28:18 UTC  

even then

2020-11-09 19:28:28 UTC  

you get a smaller dose if breathed through a mask, and if dispensed through a mask

2020-11-09 19:29:09 UTC  

The main vector is particles that wouldn't be stopped by most masks (unless you happen to be running around with an N95)

2020-11-09 19:29:16 UTC  

And know how to wear it properly.

2020-11-09 19:29:42 UTC  

The mask idea is primarily to prevent spread, not protect the user (which it doesn't really do in most cases)

2020-11-09 19:29:43 UTC  

that won't be stopped _perfectly_

2020-11-09 19:30:09 UTC  

they would certainly be _reduced_

2020-11-09 19:30:17 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/772982351520333824/775442157657915472/EW4AXgbWsAEAovl.png

2020-11-09 19:30:21 UTC  

your pants won't stop pee

2020-11-09 19:30:27 UTC  

but I still want you to wear them

2020-11-09 19:30:30 UTC  

lol

2020-11-09 19:31:31 UTC  

Pretty sure that we know that viral load is important to disease severity.

2020-11-09 19:31:33 UTC  

until you show me a study that proves with _finality_ that masks are not effective _at all_ or are worse than wearing nothing, imma default to assuming that it is logical to wear them

2020-11-09 19:31:52 UTC  

But I am not sure how much we know about the vectors of typical infection rates.

2020-11-09 19:32:18 UTC  

If it's primarily small aerosolized particles (likely), or large ones that slowly float down to the ground (unlikely).

2020-11-09 19:34:54 UTC  

I'm not personally against masks, but I have a feeling I understand where Doc is coming from.

2020-11-09 19:35:09 UTC  

Forgive me if I'm interpreting it wrong, Doc.

2020-11-09 19:35:58 UTC  

But if we say 99% of infections are caused by aerosolized particles, masks aren't really going to help in the slightest.

2020-11-09 19:38:10 UTC  

I could be wrong, but aerosolized particles are practically free-moving between surgical masks and the like. I'm not sure how effectively they filter them.

2020-11-09 19:38:12 UTC  

I don't think that's true

2020-11-09 19:38:33 UTC  

water isn't affected by pants

2020-11-09 19:38:39 UTC  

but it is

2020-11-09 19:38:52 UTC  

airflow affects air around it

2020-11-09 19:39:06 UTC  

But you're not breathing through your pants.

2020-11-09 19:39:09 UTC  

I would be extremely skeptical that a mask does not affect any sized particles

2020-11-09 19:39:15 UTC  

no matter how small

2020-11-09 19:39:20 UTC  

It'll affect larger particles for sure.

2020-11-09 19:39:46 UTC  

just google the studies about n95 masks and aerosolized particles

2020-11-09 19:39:55 UTC  

they talk about differences of .6% and a few percent

2020-11-09 19:40:04 UTC  

i.e it is bad when it is letting in 5% of particles

2020-11-09 19:40:06 UTC  

verses 100%

2020-11-09 19:40:34 UTC  

5% of particles could be the primarily-sized particles that lead to the most cases of infections.