Comments by "betabenja" (@betabenja) on "Florida Governor accused of lying about pandemic by protesters" video.

@unpaidtroll8475 what are you talking about? N95 literally means 95% protection. schools are not back to capacity or sporting events, but would be a lot quicker if people actually wore them. not wearing a mask protects 0%. are you really that poor at basic reasoning?
3
@DrDaddy-yg2ki nope. there are three level of protection at different particle sizes. two of them are near 100% effective, and the latter is only 95%, hence the name. viruses are aribourne on water droplets that come in varying sizes, and the droplets get trapped with varying efficacy defined by the rating. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAdanPfQdCA
2
@DrDaddy-yg2ki if you look carefully, the video is astoundingly well referenced. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4646082/ in particular came to the conclusion that they are 95% effective at removing viruses, from 2013. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/ gives many varying sizes for droplets, but most droplets are the same in size, whether or not they are carrying flu or covid. As you are informing me, presumably after watching the youtube video, since it makes the same exact point, you have a reponsibility to wear the mask properly, and ill fitting masks will bypass the filter. Suffice to say, the masks are certainly trapping the majority of viral particulates; that in combination with social distancing, (since the second study also comes to the conclusion that unless you are coughed or sneezed on from some dick not wearing a mask), you have a very good chance of being protected.
1
@Dr. Daddy second link study says if not coughing or sneezing, viruses are transmitted in droplets of 8microns, which first study says is 95% filtered. it does not look into virus sizes no, because that's not how they're transmitted. however, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.13494.pdf states that 95% of particles 0.3 micron in size are caught, which is what you claim to be the corona virus size. for someone so scathing about the sources and research, where are your papers to support your claims?
1
@DrDaddy-yg2ki after you commented that the video is not a good enough source, I have provided three papers from peer reviewed experts following a scientific process to come to their conclusions. please provide some counter evidence, otherwise you are no better than a conspiracy theorist.
1
@DrDaddy-yg2ki Some answers: "based on the fact that youve provided a youtube video" untrue - I've provided all the supporting evidence. "stuf thats a decade old" - do you think masks have got better or worse in a decade? " 3m makes the masks in question" -no, N95 is a standard many people make them " it point blank says on their site they DONOT and are not supposed to be used to keep you from being infected with virus sized particles." 3M's says: "As a respirator, it is intended to reduce wearer exposure to certain airborne particles in a size range of 0.1 to >10.0 microns" in its own fact sheet at https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/175119O/1860-1860s-particulate-respirator-and-surgical-mask.pdf again, where is your counter evidence, or did you just make it up? It is sounding like the story from a child.
1
@DrDaddy-yg2ki 1 "youre the one sounding like a child which is why you refuse to let it go." the unawareness of of your own hypocrisy is astounding 2.how about don't cherry pick 3M then, and address N95 as a standard? 3. no, the sources preceede the youtube video. you understand that, right? just because they are included on a video does not invalidate them somehow. Don't be silly. and a 10 year old study is better than no evidence, isn't it? like what you have. 4. the weak pdf "study" which I had not referred to as a "study" is in fact the 3M fact sheet on its N95 masks. You know, the 3m one you keep referring to a your evidence? I guess you're right in that it's far more weak than a peer reviewed study. Like what I gave as my evidence. 5. once again, the self awareness gap is astonishing. I am quoting your post above when you claim .3: "over 30 and N95 is one of them and it wont filter out the flu which is like .11 microns while corona is about.3. Most ..." did you just do that stupid preschool decimal thing you accused me of doing? Are you just going to move the goal posts again if another piece of evidence shows you to be wrong? Lastly, I'm not letting this go because it's important people realise this is all not a hoax, and masks do what they're supposed to do.
1