Advice on mask-wearing to protect against Covid-19

Morrisons have just announced they will not allow anyone in their stores without a facemask (unless they are medically exempt). I thought this was supposed to be the case months ago!
I despair.
No one should be allowed in shops without facemasks, including children and staff even if they are 'exempt'.
 
Last edited:
I think the problem is determining whether someone is medically exempt - until now, they've rather had to assume that if anyone is not wearing a mask it's because they're exempt, whereas now it sounds as though they may actually be challenged for evidence (I'm told you can buy "exemption cards" on Amazon :( ). I suspect it might be breaking the Equalities Act to refuse someone access to a shop because they're not wearing a mask, in case they had some sort of mental health problem which meant they couldn't cope with wearing one.
 
Face mask warning as scientists find dangerous chemical exposure in some coverings

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle...-coverings/ar-BB1fdjvL?ocid=ASUDHP&li=AAnZ9Ug

The implication is that the masks in question are "surgical" masks, but this isn't altogether clear.

"We found formaldehyde and even aniline and noticed that unknown artificial fragrances were being applied to cover any unpleasant chemical smells from the mask.

"In the case of the blue-coloured surgical masks, we found cobalt - which can be used as a blue dye.

"All in all, we have a chemical cocktail in front of our nose and mouth that has never been tested for either toxicity or any long-term effects on health."
Click to expand...
 
The C.D.C. now says it is safe for fully vaccinated people to take their masks off in most indoor settings.T

Regarding my post #461
https://www.s4me.info/threads/covid-19-vaccines-and-vaccinations.18066/page-24#post-344804
and
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/me...ied-these-mask-rules-for-everyone/ss-BB1gNhdv

I'm so mad. I don't know why they couldn't have waited awhile longer on how they are going about not wearing masks.

I just watched Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC being questioned on a news show and have read other she has said. This that the CDC put out about not needing to wear masks if vaccinated is going to be so dangerous for many.

I couldn't tell if she is really that naive or blind about the reality of what this is or is hiding that she knows she made an error in how she handled this or if this is political in some ways.

She seems to miss and not hear the gravity of this to many, when questioned, and she glosses it over with other. Her responses have given me more insight into the mind of some of the workings of CDC and the ways I've been frustrated with them over the years and during this pandemic.

How are we to know anywhere and with not enough of the country vaccinated whether the person not wearing a mask is vaccinated or not?

I know part of this is a push to try to get more people to get vaccinated yet it's being handled wrong and a denial of realities.

She speaks of people doing the right thing and people making the right decisions to protect those around them. Also business and local governments.

Are you kidding. Where has she been? Local governments have made very bad decisions around this and have denied the realities. And individuals, so many haven't worn masks during this pandemic. Having mask mandates in businesses and places has been what has kept each of us safer.

Also many business and living situations, won't do what they need to do to protect, even more so will it be now with a statement about masks such as the CDC's. :arghh: :mad: :cry:

(Too fatigued to proof again. Hope it reads alright, I kept adding things.)
 
Last edited:
The whole 'if you've been vaccinated it doesn't matter if you have symptoms you can't spread it' line is 'suspect' IMO.

If someone has symptoms then that probably means that the virus has been able to replicate (i.e. that you are infected with the virus and it's managing to replicate, or you wouldn't have symptoms) and that the virus will be being 'shed' as part of it's normal life cycle, and that it will therefore be transmissible.

Saying otherwise seems likely to be misinformation.

Quite why they are coming out and saying such things, attempting to steer the public in this manner is not clear to me.
 
Yessica said:
How are we to know anywhere and with not enough of the country vaccinated whether the person not wearing a mask is vaccinated or not?
Click to expand...

The US is calling it 'the honor system'. :emoji_rolling_eyes:

We are still in an 8 week stay-at-home order lockdown. On Saturday there was a HUGE rally of 'freedom fighters' and "anti-mask' rebels all glued to together like sardines w/o masks.

Canada is only 3% fully vaccinated.
 
Mij said:
We are still in an 8 week stay-at-home order lockdown. On Saturday there was a HUGE rally of 'freedom fighters' and "anti-mask' rebels all glued to together like sardines w/o masks.

Canada is only 3% fully vaccinated.
Click to expand...

So sorry @Mij! :hug:

Mij said:
The US is calling it 'the honor system'. :emoji_rolling_eyes:
Click to expand...

Thank you for writing that. I'm needing to get on a letter writing mission regarding this to try to help protect at least some of us in some places. Using the words "the honor system" will help for some of what I need to say.
 
Masks look like they should work, but that’s not the same thing is actually working. Where I live there was a mask mandate both indoors and outdoors and pretty high compliance. It was still one of the worst spots in the USA for infections.

It seems like a good deal of virus output is in the form of Particles small enough to hang in the air for a while, so if you’re indoors the stuff slowly builds up and floats around on subtle indoor air currents. This theory would explain why my metropolis of multiunit buildings had high infection rate even while under lockdown. They locked people into their closed buildings with the virus.

Edit: Perhaps masks work to an extent, but not enough to counteract the high viral output and its super contagious quality.
 
Last edited:
Basic masks should have been a no-brainer on precautionary & historical grounds alone. They are very low cost, easy to make and distribute, involve zero medical risk, have high plausibility, and the potential benefits are huge.

Even if they only reduced transmission by say 20% that is still a big win in public health terms, for effectively zero cost/risk.
 
I think one of the issues is that people dont seem to wear them properly, even the N95 masks are worn loosely with big gaps on either side of the nose, so they slip down to the very tip of the nose because the wire isnt pressed tightly, & massive gaping gaps at the sides of the face on most surgical masks. Plus the constant slippage because they not worn properly & then the consequent repeated touching of them (with dirty hands on the area of the mask which is right where it will be breathed in), which is something i see all the time, even by personnel who've supposedly been taught better...it drives me crazy.

Also i was in the dentist on monday and they were getting people to take off perfectly good N95 type masks, indoors & then put on surgical masks from a pile on the table which had been exposed to the air in there for several hours/days & quite possibly contaminated.

Masks effectiveness is about a lot more than the level of filtration.
 
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2021/05/19/science.abg6296

Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission

Abstract

Airborne transmission by droplets and aerosols is important for the spread of viruses. Face masks are a well-established preventive measure, but their effectiveness for mitigating SARS-CoV-2 transmission is still under debate.

We show that variations in mask efficacy can be explained by different regimes of virus abundance and related to population-average infection probability and reproduction number. For SARS-CoV-2, the viral load of infectious individuals can vary by orders of magnitude.

We find that most environments and contacts are under conditions of low virus abundance (virus-limited) where surgical masks are effective at preventing virus spread.

More advanced masks and other protective equipment are required in potentially virus-rich indoor environments including medical centers and hospitals.

Masks are particularly effective in combination with other preventive measures like ventilation and distancing.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom