Is the current aim to reduce or eliminate exposure to the virus?

[Meerkat]

No, but there's absolutely no doubt that any kind of mask covering the mouth will stop ejection of nearly all infected droplets of spit and mucus from the mouths of those who may not be displaying any symptoms in the most contagious stage of the illness.
Is the following list of countries wrong in their approach?:
View attachment 76914

Why would asymptomatic people being expelling droplets? They aren’t coughing or sneezing.
as for your list of countries - maybe they are just caving into public demand for easy “solutions” without any scientific evidence.

There aren't really disbenefits of wearing homemade cloth ones (other than in vigorous exercise which some won't be able to do any more). The disbenefit of people pursuing medical grade ones, and you know they will, is that they get them instead of the NHS.

Homemade cloth ones will be even worse - constantly fiddled with, and reused a lot whilst they become warm, soggy, virus cultures.

What Khan is seemingly failing to realise is that there must be an explanation as to why tube drivers have been catching the virus at an increased frequency compared to the general public, despite them spending relatively little time in public areas and therefore having little difference in terms of exposure to airborne virus particles than regular commuters. This would suggest that the cause must be something that drivers are coming into contact with that commuters are not.

Working in the tube must knacker your lungs, but as others have said it’s probably contact spreading of a small number of case quickly across the workforce.

 

[Domh245]

Why would asymptomatic people being expelling droplets? They aren’t coughing or sneezing.

It's possible to sneeze or cough (or even unintentionally spit when you talk!) whilst being normally healthy.

 

[Meerkat]

It's possible to sneeze or cough (or even unintentionally spit when you talk!) whilst being normally healthy.

True, but you do that into your arm or you aren’t going to get off that tube alive!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Working in the tube must knacker your lungs, but as others have said it’s probably contact spreading of a small number of case quickly across the workforce.

You might well have it (!) there. The virus does seem to be more likely to adversely effect those with lung problems - and because of how filthy the air is in the Tube, drivers are rather prone to respiratory issues and have a quite short life expectancy.

Arguably they'd be better off wearing masks (of the kind cyclists wear to protect themselves from exhaust fumes) normally!

 

[Meerkat]

You might well have it (!) there. The virus does seem to be more likely to adversely effect those with lung problems - and because of how filthy the air is in the Tube, drivers are rather prone to respiratory issues and have a quite short life expectancy.

Arguably they'd be better off wearing masks (of the kind cyclists wear to protect themselves from exhaust fumes) normally!

A very sedentary job too - can’t get up to go for a drink and don’t really need to walk to the printer!

 

[Cowley]

I think we probably need to get back on topic here.
If someone wants to start a thread about tube drivers being exposed to the virus or unpleasant air generally then feel free to do that.

 

[MarkyT]

Homemade cloth ones will be even worse - constantly fiddled with, and reused a lot whilst they become warm, soggy, virus cultures

A small correction there: A virus needs living host cells to reproduce, which I am led to believe it destroys in the process. When it does this in the lungs of a patient that's when it causes so much damage in conjunction with the body's own immune response. For the purpose of blocking expelled potentially infected droplets, the state of a mask and the wearer's hygiene habits are immaterial less critical to the safety of others around them, as long as it is intact and worn correctly over the mouth.

 

[edwin_m]

A small correction there: A virus needs living host cells to reproduce, which I am led to believe it destroys in the process. When it does this in the lungs of a patient that's when it causes so much damage in conjunction with the body's own immune response. For the purpose of blocking expelled potentially infected droplets, the state of a mask and the wearer's hygiene habits are immaterial to the safety of others around them, as long as it is intact and worn correctly over the mouth.

The risk is surely that the wearer will have to adjust the mask, and in doing so will transfer any virus onto their hands and thus onto handrails etc to be picked up by someone else. Or if the person has already picked up the virus on their hands they may transfer it to their eyes or nose when adjusting the mask.

 

[MarkyT]

The risk is surely that the wearer will have to adjust the mask, and in doing so will transfer any virus onto their hands and thus onto handrails etc to be picked up by someone else. Or if the person has already picked up the virus on their hands they may transfer it to their eyes or nose when adjusting the mask.

Agreed these are both risks. I've changed my original text from 'immaterial' to 'less critical'. I think on balance. the former is probably less of a risk to others than the infected wearer not wearing at all and repeatedly launching droplets into the environment directly into the faces of others nearby. The latter is part of the protective properties to the wearer and there mask hygiene is important clearly. Mask wearing must be combined with good hand hygiene to be effective for the wearer, so when out and about any touching of public surfaces should still always be followed by the use of sanitiser gel if soap and water washing is not immediately possible. The presence of a mask can help as a reminder not to touch the face, and can also prevent direct contact with the mouth and nose area.

 

[HH]

The presence of a mask can help as a reminder not to touch the face...

I find that gloves do this rather better.

 

[Meerkat]

For the purpose of blocking expelled potentially infected droplets, the state of a mask and the wearer's hygiene habits are immaterial less critical to the safety of others around them, as long as it is intact and worn correctly over the mouth.

How much is expelled by ordinary breathing? And I was thinking more that the soggy mask will trap other’s virus and stay there/get sucked through/wait for hand contact.

The presence of a mask can help as a reminder not to touch the face,

Or it is perpetually being fiddled with.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find that gloves do this rather better.

Gloves are a very bad idea because you can't wash them like you can your hands.

 

[HH]

Gloves are a very bad idea because you can't wash them like you can your hands.

Unless you wash your hands every few seconds then stopping touching your face is more effective than washing your hands more often.

 

[trebor79]

Requiring them on public transport might have another side benefit - wearing one is not enjoyable, so it might cause people to choose other modes where they don't have to wear one for now. I doubt I will go off randomly riding trains (even where allowed) until mask use is no longer necessary. I'm not massively scared of catching COVID, however I am not going to do something for pleasure that would require an unpleasant thing to be done to do it - that would be like going and riding 153s for fun.

What I am slightly concerned about is a general requirement for wearing one outside, as this may pose issues with regard to exercise, certainly there's no way I can run with one, I can barely get enough air in without one (the joys of exercise induced asthma).

There was a scientist on Radio 4 last night talking about this. He was relaying some of his own observations of those wearing masks "for example on Hampstead Heath. People were walking in the open air wearing masks, which is literally pointless. They then came across someone they knew and removed it in order to be able speak more clearly - so the exact opposite of what you want to do."
He was talking about behaviours of the mass public complicating the argument over mask wearing - but either way he was unequivocal that wearing a mask in a non-crowded outdoor location was pointless.
AFAIK all of the mandatory mask wearing abroad is specific to places likes shops, public transport etc. I don't think anyone is seriously proposing a mask is worn for a walk in the country or a day on the beach.

 

[trebor79]

There aren't really disbenefits of wearing homemade cloth ones (other than in vigorous exercise which some won't be able to do any more). The disbenefit of people pursuing medical grade ones, and you know they will, is that they get them instead of the NHS.

And that the medical grade ones are designed to protect only the wearer, and have one-way valves which open during exhalation and thus service to spread any droplets rather than catch them.
I'd reluctantly support recommendations for cloth masks in specific circumstances if it came with a ban on the general public wearing respirators and fines for anyone caught doing so - a waste of NHS PPE and a potential virus spreading behaviour.

Notably hardly anyone wearing a mask in Tesco last night. Down from maybe a fifth of a quarter of people last week to just one person I saw actually wearing one (and another who had one dangling from his belt).

 

[Meerkat]

AFAIK all of the mandatory mask wearing abroad is specific to places likes shops, public transport etc.

Which is almost worse as people will be taking them on and off....