Comments by "N Marbletoe" (@nmarbletoe8210) on "Mask wearing with Lindsey" video.

@Lost Hero ... and yet you type very whiny comments... lets turn that frown upside down, partner! I like your face shield suggestion!! Clear plastic shields like those used by doctors, and I imagine by hobbyists who want to protect the whole face from spray of super glue or whatever. . perhaps walmart has em
3
Sirius Magus I'm not advocating mandatory anything here. I am in favor of volunteerism. . I mean, it's ok if shops require masks or shields, with exceptions, but they should not be mandatory just to be "in public. No fear no blame, we're in one boat so be considerate. Marble out. .
2
That is confirmed by meta-analysis. . Eye protection reduced infection rate by 10.6% -- about as much as masks (14.3%) or moving from <1m to >1m away from someone who is infected (10.2%). "Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD -10·6%, 95% CI -12·5 to -7·7; low certainty)." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32497510/
2
yes. i like sunglasses. wearing eye protection = 10.3% risk reduction. masks = 14.3%, and moving more than 1m from someone = 10.2%. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32497510/
1
@astroman5923 correct, perfume is composed of single molecules that are very small compared to a single virion. . Also, a single virion won't survive long -- it must be inside the body or a droplet to last more than seconds I would guess. I would love to see a graph of survival time vs droplet size. .
1
We simply need random sample studies like they did in iceland! There's no other (cheap) way to estimate prevalence in an area. Then we can decide. Right now we don't have the data to make an informed decision about behaviour.
1
@astroman5923 The perfect is the enemy of the good. . Mask-pushers and mask-phobes both need to chill out. We need about 70% mask usage. 90% would be better. . Trying to get 100% is going to HURT the cause not help it. .
1
Certainly we can all agree, there would be no public health reason to require people who are immune to SARS-cov-2 virus to wear a mask to combat this pandemic. . There might be psychological reasons, but if a person cannot catch or transmit it, that's better than any mask. . Our state epi said we don't need 100% mask usage, 70% will damp out outbreaks along with our other measures. So don't freak out if you see a person without. But if you can, wear one.
1
@geo-wi4tv ok right on! I actually like masks. . I like being healthy, and it's fun. I had a fisherman's UV face wrap for kayaking, and put that on top of an N95, with sunglasses and a cap and welding gloves... all need is a horse with a disguise and I could rob a train. . But the train don't got nothen I want. Lucky train.
1
@karynhonor6639 The prescription should not be "masks when you go out" but rather, "masks when there's risk of transmission." . I can go out and drive around with no mask and no risk to anyone. It's important to be correct in the details, and forego slogans. Let's be actually factually scientifically correct!
1
@karstenschuhmann8334 People are most infectious in the 24 before AND the day or two after symptoms first appear. Just to correct a small but important point. . A few weeks after clearing the infection a person shouldn't be infectious or infect-able. They should not need a mask for any reason of public health.
1
However the virus lifespan outside of a larger droplet is very short. . We need to know what the graph is of lifespan of viability vs size of droplet for a given environment. I believe you will find lone viruses live milliseconds, but that's just a guess.
1