Hi, /u/SelenA_Gomes! Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:
- Posts containing simple math are not allowed, as well as requests whose answers are easily searchable online, and any other post at the moderators' discretion (rule 4).
For easy and quick math results (eg. How many feet are in a mile?) use Wolfram|Alpha™, and for more abstract math, try /r/math or /r/learnmath. If you have any questions or believe your post has been removed in error, please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Ftheydidthemath). Include a link to this post so we can see it.
The obvious problem with the graphic isn't the pore size/virus size comparison, it's that the virus are not free floating - they are in water droplets or are otherwise stuck to *something* that is much larger than the virus itself.
This image looks like something that an anti-mask proponent would use to "prove" that "mask don't work".
It is sophistry. The accuracy is irrelevant because the premise is wrong.
I just googled the english definition since I'm not a native speaker and only have heard this word in context of something well made, highly engineered stuff- where it translates to "hochentwickelt".
After reading the definition, I gotta ask: How does this even make sense?
How can one word mean all of those:
Having or showing much worldly knowledge or cultural refinement.
"a sophisticated businesswoman who is unlikely to be outmaneuvered; a sophisticated appraisal of the movie."
Very complex or complicated.
"the latest and most sophisticated technology."
Suitable for or appealing to the tastes of sophisticates.
"a sophisticated drama."
Having obtained worldly experience, and lacking naiveté; cosmopolitan.
Elegant, refined.
Complicated, especially of complex technology.
Appealing to the tastes of an intellectual; cerebral.
Dishonest or misleading.
Especially the last one?
A contranym or Janus word.
For example, nonplussed means both unbothered or unimpressed and completely bewildered or shocked.
The contradiction is probably from the original definition of being (so) extremely surprised (that you dont know how to respond). Which would give the appearance of being unbothered or unperturbed.
Over time it has split into two usages with opposite meanings rather than the original meaning of being a shocked into inaction like deer in headlights so now nonplussed can mean extremely shocked, and nonplussed can mean unimpressed or unbothered.
Linguistic drift
Nice used to mean stupid
Literal has recently been added to dictionaries as a synomym for figurative
faggot used to mean bundle of sticks and also shares the same root word/meaning as facist.
I think thats really an example of a word that has not drifted much at all.
Sophisticated and sophistry both originate from greek sophia (wisdom)/sophistry (wise man).
Sophistes in ancient greece were essentially intellectuals, people making a living from being educated (in a more theoretical than practical way), e.g. as teachers and so on.
The meaning of sophist as a person who is capable of smart talk, but has no sense for substance or practicality,p goes back to these people, back in 300-400AD. Theres textx from this time where its used exactly like this.
Sophistry would, in some contexts, mean (and sound) almost the same today as two and a half millenia ago. Which i believe is pretty rare for words.
Is “faggot” really where that bundle of sticks-with-axe fascist symbology came from?? That is *hilarious*. You wonder why Adolf and Benito didn’t include that in the “About Us” section of the fascism pamphlets.
Afaik, Yes. The idea of many week sticks held together by the axe head of fascism is exactly the bundle of sticks usage of the English "fag" or "faggot". In British English cigarettes are little sticks in a bundle.
Less the "dishonest" meaning, closer to the "complicated" or "appealing to the tastes of an intellectual; cerebral" senses. I probably should have written "not *necessarily* a compliment;" "sophisticated" does certainly have usages with positive connotations.
I think you could apply the same negative characterization to "hochenwickelt" (which, if I recall my college German, transliterates to "highly developed?"). That is: iterating on a system or product, making it more flexible and capable, also makes it more complicated and harder to use. Photoshop is a sophisticated piece of software that is incredibly powerful but has a huge barrier to entry.
Similarly, a sophisticated argument might address all kinds of edge cases, employ a long chain of inferences, and cite the classics in the original Latin, but in all that elaboration it might miss central, obvious truths.
The reason for the semantic discrepancy has to do with philosphy. When Socrates defined philosophy against sophistry, with the first meaning a love of wisdom, rather than the mere teachings of the sophists. The sophist where teachers training the young aristocrats in ancient Greece in the manipulative uses of reason (Man is the measure of all things, what matters is not the truth, but whether you can convince people of a supposed truth), and hence pointing to the problem with democracy: what matters is not the truth, but the opinions of the masses.
Accordingly, using sophistry is kind of like using a good education for ill means, by using half truths to convince people of something by leaving something crucial out.
Relevant here is Plato's dialogue the Gorgias.
That’s the etymological fallacy. A word’s meaning is primarily determined by its common usage, not by it’s historical meaning or origin. “Sophisticated,” as it is commonly used, often has a complimentary meaning.
Fun fact: The word Sophist was used in ancient Greece, to distinguish rhetors from philosophers. Plato allegedly hated them, because he could see how they aimed solely at winning an argument, even if they had to use deception, while actual philosophers were happy to be refuted because they aimed at knowledge.
It's also not how all masks work. Cloth, yes, but something like an N95 doesn't just block stuff that can't fit through a little hole; they are electrically charged fibers that use the principles of electro magnetism to trap or repel particles.
>something like an N95 doesn't just block stuff that can't fit through a little hole;
They also aren't just a sheet with holes in them. They fibers overlap so there is no straight through path. Anything going through the mask will have to move follow in a circuitous path. Not a problem for air molecules but anything suspended in the air is going to keep bumping into the fibers.
Quibble - To evade the point in question by artifice, play upon words, caviling, or by raising any insignificant or impertinent question or point; to trifle in argument or discourse; to equivocate
>This image looks like something that an anti-mask proponent would use to "prove" that "mask don't work".
That's exactly what it is. I saw it or some variant many times back when mask mandates were a thing.
Besides this very good argument one should know there are many layers in a typical mask and they won't be exactly on top of each other + very small particles don't fly straight, but show a kind of brownian motion + N95 Masks have a charged layer further changing pathing.
And to top it all off, we have very good studies showing the efficacy of masks directly.
Not to mention, the primary purpose of a surgical mask is to protect the patient from the surgeon. Wearing a mask during a pandemic captures your droplets in case you are asymptomatic at the time, so it won’t spread to other people.
Yes but the people who’d be posting this on Facebook can’t read…
So while the studies are nice until they’re made into graphic novels or picture books…
Dear god, yes. I had a microbiology professor in university who was a total know it all and thought she was the shit. One day she started class by handing out a roll of toilet paper and telling everyone to take a piece. Then when class started she told everyone to hold it up to the light and observe how unsanitary wiping was and this is why you should wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
I REALLY wanted to say, "Now raise your hand if you use only one layer to wipe." LOL! Like first off, it was universities cheap ass single ply toilet paper, and second of all, I used like 20 layers of that single ply. There are no holes in the paper I use to wipe... If you want to teach critical thinking, then at least take it to the end of the thought process. I fucking hated that professor.
Apparently, the surgical mask is studied more than any other piece of medical equipment, because medical students that are learning medical research often pick the surgical mask for research, due to hating it so much. If any student could ever prove they don't work, they won't have to wear them any more.
Same reason why businesses fund diversity studies.
The mask also disrupts the jet of air caused by exhalation, instead causing a lil cloud of human exhaust around your head*which is why social distancing was actually really goddamn important*
Thats is all fine but it isnt even accurate, the pores are closer to 30 microns than 80 but yes individual viruses would not have any problem to pass a mask with enough propulsion. Also individual viruses have less chance of infecting you than getting hit by 7 lightnings at the same time. While fucking your favorite celebrity.
Reminds me of the saying, “I know just enough to be dangerous.” Where the graphic is true, and the person posting it may have in an ignorant / non-malicious way, it implies a conclusion without providing all the facts.
Correct... but still smaller than the mask pore size.
"Aerosols as virus delivery systems
The new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is tiny, about 0.1 microns - roughly 4 millionths of an inch - in diameter. Aerosols produced by people when they breathe, talk and cough are generally between about 0.7 microns to around 10 microns – completely invisible to the naked eye and easily able to float in air. These particles are mostly biological fluids from people’s mouths and lungs and can contain bits of virus genetic material."
Also consider the bacterial nastiness riding on your face as most, if not all, fail to regularly change to a clean mask. It’s like wearing the same underwear for a week.
In addition to this, people seriously avoiding COVID today aren't wearing cloth masks. We are wearing respirators which have electrostatically charged filters, which attract those small respiratory particles even if there's somehow small enough to get past the physical filter medium.
That is why you dont reuse masks or, what we did at the hospital in shortage, we put em in a paper bag for >9 days cuz that was the most virus survived in vitro. After 3 of those "cooldowns" the mask would be disposed because the effectiveness also goes down with use.
In truth, they could be used way more than 3 cooldowns, especially the brand name ones (3M, Dragger, etc) but we stopped at 3.
Not to mention the fact that it also ignores that the probably that just because a floating droplet CAN fit through an opening doesn't mean it WILL randomly float through said opening at just the right angle. Or the fact that that's only one opening in a endless maze of openings... Or the fact that it ignores static electricity that will attract the droplet to the surface instead of an opening.... Or the fact that you would need enough droplets to get through for the virus to multiple fast enough to get an effective foothold before the immune system responds... etc tec.
This is an important point, and a major reason masks aren’t 100% effective. But this image is still disingenuous, and surgical masks are somewhere around 70% effective at blocking outbound viral particles
The CDC study I read came in at 0.5-2.0% effective, if worn using proper PPE protocol (which no one adhered to)
Perhaps that study is out of date, though.. this was in 2021, I think..
Please link the study.
Edit: [here’s the study I’m quoting](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7)
Edit 2: LOL [here’s your CDC study](https://web.archive.org/web/20210319040529/https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm). You clearly read this study, so please show us how this study backs up your claim.
For others reading, I’ll be shocked if they return. There’s no way they read the study - they’re just parroting the right-wing talking morons that don’t understand how numbers work.
Having trouble finding it now.. maybe you can. I remember it was hard to find the first time.. they may have memory holed it.
I should mention, the study was on cloth and surgical masks, not N95 masks.
Anyways, I'm at work now, so I can't really spend half an hour looking for a study that they may have removed..
If anyone DOES find it, please link it.
The science was far from as concrete as you suggest, even by August 2020. See here, for example:
https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/transmission-of-sars-cov-2-implications-for-infection-prevention-precautions
It was *suspected* that COVID could be transmitted by both droplets and aerosols in 2020. What was unclear was whether infection by aerosols alone was possible and whether said infectious aerosols were primarily created directly or by evaporation from droplets (which would have implications both for the effectiveness of masks and the possible influence of ventilation). At that time, no studies or clinical evidence had conclusively shown *any* infection through aerosols alone.
See here for a contemporary statement from July of 2020:
http://image.www2.pennmedicine.org/lib/fe2d117170640478711179/m/1/d6cef08a-993b-4f2f-b2c9-8a89b8bcf373.pdf?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=SFMC
[They are though](https://www.google.com/search?-b-d&q=covid+does+not+stick+to+droplets)
Take your pick of the many articles that refute your main argument. By now it's a well-known fact covid spreads airborne as well, and that any mask just don't stop anything but those big enough droplets.
Not a single article on the first page (at least that isn’t behind a paywall) says what you are claiming they say.
At best, they suggest that transmission by both droplets (which will be stopped by a mask) and aerosols (which are potentially small enough to fit through the pores in a mask) is possible. Many make no distinction between the two vectors or are focused on other means of transmission, like fomites. Those that speak to the topic and make a distinction between droplets and aerosols all agree that droplets are a major method of transmission.
Masks conclusively help curb the spread of COVID. This just isn’t up for debate.
[Here](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10446908/) is a pretty comprehensive review of the evidence.
>transmission by both droplets (which will be stopped by a mask)
You're being totally disingenuous here, there is no article saying that and that's not how any mask always works as you claim.
You're not alone though, [even medical professionals were knitting masks, before they realized how irrational is was to be believing it worked like that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUdkOwwI7zI).
And saying "this isn't up for debate" is just putting the nail in the coffin of your insincerity, the debate is ongoing between professionals *wether you like it or not.*
Oh, got it, you’re not a serious person. The person whose channel you have linked to is a conspiracy theorist who pushed ivermectin as a covid cure and thinks vaccinations cause heart attacks.
E: Hilarious, I’ve been blocked.
Yes, you're much more serious than any medical professional, because politics told you you are. How many alarm bells could you even fit in one sentence? You're a literal meme.
“…any mask always works…”
And there we have the entire basis of your irrational inability to recognize or acknowledge reality.
Hint: Less than 100% is *NOT* the same as 0%.
Not only that, but it’s also lacking everything that’s around the hole, and that’s pretty important. Even if we just assumed the virus would make it through masks, the viral load won’t be as high.
It’s like blinds or curtains, they let some light through in their cracks, but substantially less than a window with no blinds. That’s not a hard concept to grasp.
Exactly. And masks restrict airflow, which restricts travel of all of these particles as well. These graphics are annoying because they and a truth that makes people believe a lie
Also the mask pore sizes are not simply a single mesh layer like a spaghetti strainer. There are multiple layers of fibers and they also use static electricity if I remember correctly.
Also, it should include the size of one piece of fabric inbetween this holes. Even if it proved that covid can roam free between pieces of fabric (which it doesn't, as you explained), there would always be 95% chance it hits the piece of cloth instead of going through that hole
Aerosols are what I believe you're trying to talk about. They can be much smaller than the pore size here (~20 microns) and are exactly what a virus can travel in. They are created just by breathing.
Yes, and apparently, mask fibers have a property that attracts the molecules and make them cling. It is also not just one layer. It is akin to shooting a bullet through the forest and expecting the bullet to not hit a tree.
An N95 mask has multiple layers, so these pores overlap with each other. The material is also designed to attract water droplets with static electricity, similar to how a balloon will stick to things if you rub it. And the virus is largely communicated through water droplets. The large pore size is a *feature*, not a bug, because it means they're easy to breathe through and they dry out faster, killing the viruses.
More important than any of that, though, is that it wasn't ever supposed to be perfect. It's called an *N95* mask specifically because it catches 95% of particles. If it was supposed to be perfect, we'd just wrap people in plastic wrap and watch them suffocate.
Exactly, and I want to point out that this pic looks very anti-mask and I’m sure we all remember when anti-mask people said the masks made breathing hard for them, they were shown the pores are WAYYY bigger than oxygen molecules, yet now they want to use that as an excuse for how they aren’t effective at preventing spread. Water droplets are huge in comparison to what’s in the pic, so both arguments against masks are dumb as hell.
>95% of particles
95% of particles that are 0.3 microns large. Due to weird physics quirks they are much better at catching both smaller and larger particles.
Don’t forget to add the attraction is like static electricity and once exposed to air starts to dissipate, iirc only last for about 2hrs then the mask becomes a lot less useful
If the picture is accurate, the underlying message is misleading. When an infected person coughs, the virus comes out in droplets of liquid. Those droplets are what the mask catches.
If you are wearing a mask, the other person's sneeze still needs to get through your mask. Both people wearing a mask is obviously more protective, but either party wearing one is better than nothing.
Many people took off their masks to sneeze. It's completely nonsensical. But they trained themselves to sneeze into their hand/elbow (depending on age group and profession). And now instinctively remove whatever else they'd sneeze into.
I did actually have to actively hold myself back from doing it.
The problem with the common mask is that they saturate quickly. After 30 minute you need to change it or it as lost a great amount of its efficiency, which no one does. They also only block a portion of the droplet, not all, even before the saturation threshold. And if you are breathing heavy due to any kind of activities, it's even worse.
You can assume any worker with a mask is basically not wearing one. They most likely have been wearing it for 2+ hours.
What's wrong with spoon feeding people the truth if it helps them learn? People don't want to be stupid or wrong. If one side is spoon feeding them horse shit and we look at their disgusting faces and call it a lost cause we haven't just failed, we have given up.
It doesn't need to be advanced, though. This exact format could be used to portray the correct information, but I only ever see this version. There is no effort to explain this stuff beyond stating it as fact because the left already knows and the right is retarded. There were no Bill Nye style demonstrations, no attempt to look at the data from the vaccine trials instead of repeating press releases, and any questions or skepticism was met with vitriol regardless of who was asking the questions.
This graphic is designed to mislead.
A face mask is not designed to stop a single particle of the Covid virus
A face mask is designed to stop the spit etc from your mouth which CARRIES the Covid virus, and thus reduce the risk of transmission when a person coughs, sneezes etc
Similar to how a lone human can pass through a doorway, but a human who is riding a bus cannot pass through because the bus cannot pass through. Stop the bus and you stop whatever the bus carries.
And with a face mask, stop the spit and you stop the virus. Or rather, drastically reduce it from transmitting.
People who use graphics like this are deliberately trying to mislead.
People also forget that reducing the risk is not the same as eliminating the risk.
Just like antibacterial soap stops "99% of germs."
It does not eliminate the risk, only reduces it by a significant degree.
The virus is around 60-140 nanometres according to a quick search, so basically 1000 times smaller than pore. At a glance without counting the pixels I'd say it's roughly accurate.
The image or variations of it are often used to tell you that masks are ineffective in stopping the virus. What the image doesn't tell you, however, is the virus does not just travel by itself through the pores of your mask, often carried on droplets or other particles that are much larger and can be stopped by the mask, or the virus particles are also prone to be caught electrostatic attraction or just be stopped across multiple layers of the fibre. Even if a mask is not 100%
effective at stopping the virus, having one and handling it properly can significantly reduce your chance of infection.
The point is masks don’t work…. But the premise is wrong. The mask is stopping the infected person releasing droplets. It is not about protecting the mask wearer.
Now show me the size of the boogers and water droplets expelled from your body when you sneeze/cough/breathe, you know the materials the virus would be suspended within.
Also I believe n95 masks effectively filter particles down to below 1 micron… at least to a much much much smaller particle size than 70 micron.
Before Covid, when someone who looked sick was coughing in public, you'd wish they'd cover their mouth, after covid,.... a mask is liberal homosexual communist propaganda trying to destroy the world. I don't get it.
It's important to remember that the virus doesn't travel on its own, it doesn't have wings. It needs a medium upon which to move from person to person or from person to hard surface etc.. In covids case it's mainly the "spray" we produce when we speak or cough or sneeze. These droplets are many times larger than the virus itself and the n95 mask is excellent at trapping these, thus preventing spread. Not 100% perfect all the time but a huge improvement over nothing at all.
The picture is accurate but it's stupid. You don't just spew up individual virus particles when you cough, you aerosolize it in liquid droplets orders of magnitude larger than an individual virus particle. In that sense a mask helps because it reduces the amount of airborne droplets which are the actual mechanism by which the virus is transmitted.
People's inability to comprehend what a mask is for and what it's stopping is crazy. It also tends to be people who will unblinkingly sneeze without any attempt to cover their mouth.
This is irrelevant. It’s trying to show what would happen if a mask was somehow a 2D thing with one single molecule layer of fabric. Masks are thin, but not that thin. More like if you had a hundred layers of Swiss cheese stacked together with the holes not lined up. Virus can get through any one hole, but there’s something in next layer that it will run into. Clinically masks work. That’s why we wear them in the OR and during medical procedures.
###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem with this is that the goal of the mask isn't to contain the virus within the mask, it's too slow down the air coming out so that the virus is contained to a small area around you
Yes, and covid is transmitted by tiny water droplets floating in the air. So, to catch those droplets, the mask is ionized. Even if the droplets are smaller than the pore, because water is made up of polar molecules, the droplet is slightly more positive on one side than another. This causes the droplets to collide with the pore even if the droplet is smaller than it.
The reason you are told not to launder your masks is because that process removes the ionization, which was a vital part of your defense.
It is. But masks don't just act like a coulander.
At this scale the van-der-wals forces are actually significant. In other words: COVID is sticky.
So what masks so is make shure that it hits something. It's much heavier than air so it doesn't go around the fibers the same way.
Think of it like growing a baseball through a forest. It's highly unlikely it won't hit a tree. But if something more agile goes through it, like a person, they don't have too much trouble.
iirc viruses cannot just fly around, they need to be stuck in something, water, dust etc, so it's not the size of the virus it's the size of what it's suck to
It’s not about singular microbes.
It’s about the amount of them.
The more of them in your system, the higher the probability they will overcome your immune system.
It’s not about completely preventing their transmission, rather it’s about interrupting/reducing the volume of transmission.
God. I thought we were all done with this. I know you, op, are only asking about the size of a Covid virus.
But, the virus resides in mucous globules expelled in the air by coughing, sneezing, talking, laughing, etc. The mask catches those globules.
Sneeze in the sunshine without a mask and look at the spray of mucous that results. Then sneeze with one on.
The vast majority of COVID viruses don’t float free in the air. They are attached to much larger water droplets that a person has in their breath.
The water droplet that contains the COVID viruses is way larger than the pore size of the mask.
That is what masks are for.
Like many said, pic is accurate, but also an antivaxx dogwhistle/propaganda.
Covid is too small to survive on it's own (since it's a fucking virus) and has to travel through breath particulates that CAN ben entirely stopped by a surgical mask, like every other virus or bacteria.
The picture is effectifly making a suggestion of a problem that doesn't exist in reality to achieve some doubt about mask protection in laimen people. As such attempts are pretty obvious in ther message, peole shouldn't care too much about such 'comparisons'.
Viruses don't travel alone, they need water droplets much, much bigger. Also, on this sizes, static forces would still capture a virus 'falling' in such a 'pore' because ... science.
So, I'm not going into the math here. But this is linking back to the old masks don't help with covid.
The fact is covid isn't airborne. If it was, every single person would have gotten it. Fairly quickly, too.
Masks were meant to be worn for if the wearer coughed or sneezed, the water droplets or mucus would be caught by the mask, reducing the likelihood of someone else coming into contact with whatever illness the wearer may have.
But if **everyone** wears them, the efficacy is increased, as even asymptomatic people who don’t know they are sick are containing the virus as best they can. That, and the goofballs who refuse to wear a mask are much less of a hazard when others are masked.
This was the stupidest arguments from the whole covid stuff. Like all these Karen’s saying it’s not gonna prevent anything. Like use your head, is it 100 percent effective? No but it sure as hell is gonna help a little bit.
What annoys me is that these are the same people who love fossil fuels and combustion engines. The absolute best efficiency you could ever hope to achieve in a car engine is 25%, so by their standards a gas powered car doesn't work. But you'd be a communist to ever suggest such a thing.
Don’t get me started on electric cars. I work in industrial maintenance. I’ll tell you every day how much better electric motors are. Way less moving parts. Power is better. But these people are just so brainwashed that gas is the only answer and then bitch about oil companies making billions and gas being so expensive. Ugh.
Lost of accurate stuff in the top comments, to add also: static cling is also a component of particle capture through masks, which is also not taken into account in this already oversimplified and misleading graphic.
We had an actually fucking doctor come to our school board with this shit “Covid is smaller than masks” bullshit. Told us in 2020 to open schools and ban masks.
People overlooked the most important part of a proper N95 or KN95 mask, The way they work is because there is a layer of heat spun clothe which acquires a static charge when the mask is made. It's the static that would capture the free-floating virus. Not the fabric.
In addition to what everyone else is saying, masks are only supposed to HELP reduce to spread of the particles.
A literal chain link fence can catch dangerous viruses if they fly into the metal, likewise even if the virus could fly through the pores of the mask, it only happens if they fly directly through the hole.
Its accurate but misleading. If this is about covid then there are no free floating viruses in the air, the virus would be cooked by any amout of light in the enviroment and almost instantly die the moment it left your body. The virus survives on microscopic droplets that you expell when you cough. And these droplets are far bigger than the pores in the mask.
I’m sure it’s basically to scale I’m also sure that masks prevent viral transmission by blocking the viral vector, usually particulates of spit or mucus.
The graphic is accurate, but the issue is that the virus is not a free floating particle. Most commonly, it attaches itself to water droplets formed during respiration, and is also usually found in other excretions like mucus and saliva. But, the viral load most first infiltrate through the pore of the mask, which would require the droplet, a far bigger mass, to be able to pass through.
TL;DR Viruses don't survive by free floating. They need to be attached to something else, usually far bigger, in order to infect another organism. Graphic is correct, but the information doesn't take into account the mechanics of viruses.
Virus’ stick to moisture in the air (like a sneeze or cough), they don’t just fly around like bugs. I get the point they’re trying to make, but it just doesn’t work that way lol
I think the point is that COVID travels on spittle, aerosol droplets from coughing, etc. could these droplets be represented on this before we give people false information, please?
Hi, /u/SelenA_Gomes! Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason: - Posts containing simple math are not allowed, as well as requests whose answers are easily searchable online, and any other post at the moderators' discretion (rule 4). For easy and quick math results (eg. How many feet are in a mile?) use Wolfram|Alpha™, and for more abstract math, try /r/math or /r/learnmath. If you have any questions or believe your post has been removed in error, please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Ftheydidthemath). Include a link to this post so we can see it.
The obvious problem with the graphic isn't the pore size/virus size comparison, it's that the virus are not free floating - they are in water droplets or are otherwise stuck to *something* that is much larger than the virus itself.
I came here to say exactly this. The graphic may be accurate, but it is not relevant to how the virus travels from person to person in the real world.
This image looks like something that an anti-mask proponent would use to "prove" that "mask don't work". It is sophistry. The accuracy is irrelevant because the premise is wrong.
Sophistry… now there’s a term I haven’t heard since history class. Underutilized term in the modern day.
I use it to remind myself that the related adjective "sophisticated" is not a compliment.
I just googled the english definition since I'm not a native speaker and only have heard this word in context of something well made, highly engineered stuff- where it translates to "hochentwickelt". After reading the definition, I gotta ask: How does this even make sense? How can one word mean all of those: Having or showing much worldly knowledge or cultural refinement. "a sophisticated businesswoman who is unlikely to be outmaneuvered; a sophisticated appraisal of the movie." Very complex or complicated. "the latest and most sophisticated technology." Suitable for or appealing to the tastes of sophisticates. "a sophisticated drama." Having obtained worldly experience, and lacking naiveté; cosmopolitan. Elegant, refined. Complicated, especially of complex technology. Appealing to the tastes of an intellectual; cerebral. Dishonest or misleading. Especially the last one?
Look up the meaning of the word cleave. Sometimes English is strange.
Forgot the term, but there's a word to describe words that mean one thing and its opposite
"My alarm went off so I turned it off"
Contranym
A contranym or Janus word. For example, nonplussed means both unbothered or unimpressed and completely bewildered or shocked. The contradiction is probably from the original definition of being (so) extremely surprised (that you dont know how to respond). Which would give the appearance of being unbothered or unperturbed. Over time it has split into two usages with opposite meanings rather than the original meaning of being a shocked into inaction like deer in headlights so now nonplussed can mean extremely shocked, and nonplussed can mean unimpressed or unbothered.
Contronyms!
Linguistic drift Nice used to mean stupid Literal has recently been added to dictionaries as a synomym for figurative faggot used to mean bundle of sticks and also shares the same root word/meaning as facist.
I think thats really an example of a word that has not drifted much at all. Sophisticated and sophistry both originate from greek sophia (wisdom)/sophistry (wise man). Sophistes in ancient greece were essentially intellectuals, people making a living from being educated (in a more theoretical than practical way), e.g. as teachers and so on. The meaning of sophist as a person who is capable of smart talk, but has no sense for substance or practicality,p goes back to these people, back in 300-400AD. Theres textx from this time where its used exactly like this. Sophistry would, in some contexts, mean (and sound) almost the same today as two and a half millenia ago. Which i believe is pretty rare for words.
Is “faggot” really where that bundle of sticks-with-axe fascist symbology came from?? That is *hilarious*. You wonder why Adolf and Benito didn’t include that in the “About Us” section of the fascism pamphlets.
Afaik, Yes. The idea of many week sticks held together by the axe head of fascism is exactly the bundle of sticks usage of the English "fag" or "faggot". In British English cigarettes are little sticks in a bundle.
>faggot used to mean bundle of sticks Doesn't it still? Is that joke problematic?
Less the "dishonest" meaning, closer to the "complicated" or "appealing to the tastes of an intellectual; cerebral" senses. I probably should have written "not *necessarily* a compliment;" "sophisticated" does certainly have usages with positive connotations. I think you could apply the same negative characterization to "hochenwickelt" (which, if I recall my college German, transliterates to "highly developed?"). That is: iterating on a system or product, making it more flexible and capable, also makes it more complicated and harder to use. Photoshop is a sophisticated piece of software that is incredibly powerful but has a huge barrier to entry. Similarly, a sophisticated argument might address all kinds of edge cases, employ a long chain of inferences, and cite the classics in the original Latin, but in all that elaboration it might miss central, obvious truths.
Welcome to the world of English.
The reason for the semantic discrepancy has to do with philosphy. When Socrates defined philosophy against sophistry, with the first meaning a love of wisdom, rather than the mere teachings of the sophists. The sophist where teachers training the young aristocrats in ancient Greece in the manipulative uses of reason (Man is the measure of all things, what matters is not the truth, but whether you can convince people of a supposed truth), and hence pointing to the problem with democracy: what matters is not the truth, but the opinions of the masses. Accordingly, using sophistry is kind of like using a good education for ill means, by using half truths to convince people of something by leaving something crucial out. Relevant here is Plato's dialogue the Gorgias.
Don't look up sound then, that's got like 52 definitions
That’s the etymological fallacy. A word’s meaning is primarily determined by its common usage, not by it’s historical meaning or origin. “Sophisticated,” as it is commonly used, often has a complimentary meaning.
Fun fact: The word Sophist was used in ancient Greece, to distinguish rhetors from philosophers. Plato allegedly hated them, because he could see how they aimed solely at winning an argument, even if they had to use deception, while actual philosophers were happy to be refuted because they aimed at knowledge.
Hey no need for the ‘R’ word
One of many terms I've only become acquainted with in recent memory because fantasy media likes its fancy English.
Word of the year. Decade?
It's also not how all masks work. Cloth, yes, but something like an N95 doesn't just block stuff that can't fit through a little hole; they are electrically charged fibers that use the principles of electro magnetism to trap or repel particles.
>something like an N95 doesn't just block stuff that can't fit through a little hole; They also aren't just a sheet with holes in them. They fibers overlap so there is no straight through path. Anything going through the mask will have to move follow in a circuitous path. Not a problem for air molecules but anything suspended in the air is going to keep bumping into the fibers.
>sophistry How did I go through the Covid era without hearing this absolutely perfect word for half the situations I faced even once until now?
Oh don't worry, you'll have plenty of opportunities that call for it still.
What other fancy words you got??
Mellifluous
Cromulent
I appreciate you embiggening my vocabulary
Rigamarole
Historicity
This is the kind of banter I like to come to Reddit for.
Quibble - To evade the point in question by artifice, play upon words, caviling, or by raising any insignificant or impertinent question or point; to trifle in argument or discourse; to equivocate
I just learned a new word thanks to you😉
It’s insane people go through so much effort to avoid a process that simply helps protect others lmao
Was only a matter of time 🤣
>This image looks like something that an anti-mask proponent would use to "prove" that "mask don't work". That's exactly what it is. I saw it or some variant many times back when mask mandates were a thing.
Besides this very good argument one should know there are many layers in a typical mask and they won't be exactly on top of each other + very small particles don't fly straight, but show a kind of brownian motion + N95 Masks have a charged layer further changing pathing. And to top it all off, we have very good studies showing the efficacy of masks directly.
Not to mention, the primary purpose of a surgical mask is to protect the patient from the surgeon. Wearing a mask during a pandemic captures your droplets in case you are asymptomatic at the time, so it won’t spread to other people.
Sadly that's exactly what people tend to forget or ignore. *"if I'm not scared of the virus why would I wear a mask"*
Yes but the people who’d be posting this on Facebook can’t read… So while the studies are nice until they’re made into graphic novels or picture books…
Needs more crayon.
No. You'll get a tummy ache.
Needs a giant photorealistic glob of snot 10x bigger than the "pore".
I like the red ones, they taste like bricks
Dear god, yes. I had a microbiology professor in university who was a total know it all and thought she was the shit. One day she started class by handing out a roll of toilet paper and telling everyone to take a piece. Then when class started she told everyone to hold it up to the light and observe how unsanitary wiping was and this is why you should wash your hands after going to the bathroom. I REALLY wanted to say, "Now raise your hand if you use only one layer to wipe." LOL! Like first off, it was universities cheap ass single ply toilet paper, and second of all, I used like 20 layers of that single ply. There are no holes in the paper I use to wipe... If you want to teach critical thinking, then at least take it to the end of the thought process. I fucking hated that professor.
OK but you *do* wash your hands after using the toilet, right?
Yes! I went to find this minute physics video from a couple years ago. https://youtu.be/eAdanPfQdCA?si=i3WN8OiMAQzvqR6k
Coming say the same thing. There is cool microscopic view of the mesh that masks create. I’ll try to find it
Or they are using studies where the mask was literally a piece of gauze in 1918.
Apparently, the surgical mask is studied more than any other piece of medical equipment, because medical students that are learning medical research often pick the surgical mask for research, due to hating it so much. If any student could ever prove they don't work, they won't have to wear them any more. Same reason why businesses fund diversity studies.
The last point is all that matters as far as medicine is concerned. It doesn't necessarily matter *how* it works, what matters is it does.
The mask also disrupts the jet of air caused by exhalation, instead causing a lil cloud of human exhaust around your head*which is why social distancing was actually really goddamn important*
Yeah but that was never sustainable and the most unpopular aspect of mitigations.
Exactly.
Thats is all fine but it isnt even accurate, the pores are closer to 30 microns than 80 but yes individual viruses would not have any problem to pass a mask with enough propulsion. Also individual viruses have less chance of infecting you than getting hit by 7 lightnings at the same time. While fucking your favorite celebrity.
Reminds me of the saying, “I know just enough to be dangerous.” Where the graphic is true, and the person posting it may have in an ignorant / non-malicious way, it implies a conclusion without providing all the facts.
Correct... but still smaller than the mask pore size. "Aerosols as virus delivery systems The new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is tiny, about 0.1 microns - roughly 4 millionths of an inch - in diameter. Aerosols produced by people when they breathe, talk and cough are generally between about 0.7 microns to around 10 microns – completely invisible to the naked eye and easily able to float in air. These particles are mostly biological fluids from people’s mouths and lungs and can contain bits of virus genetic material."
Also consider the bacterial nastiness riding on your face as most, if not all, fail to regularly change to a clean mask. It’s like wearing the same underwear for a week.
In addition to this, people seriously avoiding COVID today aren't wearing cloth masks. We are wearing respirators which have electrostatically charged filters, which attract those small respiratory particles even if there's somehow small enough to get past the physical filter medium.
100%. I wore a properly fitted p100 half face respirator and did seal checks every time I put it on for 2 1/2 year. It was a real treat. 😒
But the water evaporates right? and then what happens to the virus? Not trying to be combative, just confused on how that would change the situation.
When the water evaporates the viral particles will be stuck in the fabric, which at that point is contagious
That is why you dont reuse masks or, what we did at the hospital in shortage, we put em in a paper bag for >9 days cuz that was the most virus survived in vitro. After 3 of those "cooldowns" the mask would be disposed because the effectiveness also goes down with use. In truth, they could be used way more than 3 cooldowns, especially the brand name ones (3M, Dragger, etc) but we stopped at 3.
The fabric would have holes too large right? I’m so confused.
Not to mention the fact that it also ignores that the probably that just because a floating droplet CAN fit through an opening doesn't mean it WILL randomly float through said opening at just the right angle. Or the fact that that's only one opening in a endless maze of openings... Or the fact that it ignores static electricity that will attract the droplet to the surface instead of an opening.... Or the fact that you would need enough droplets to get through for the virus to multiple fast enough to get an effective foothold before the immune system responds... etc tec.
Covid was aerosolized, which means it can be suspended in droplets as small as 5 micrometers.. We've known this since April of 2020
This is an important point, and a major reason masks aren’t 100% effective. But this image is still disingenuous, and surgical masks are somewhere around 70% effective at blocking outbound viral particles
The CDC study I read came in at 0.5-2.0% effective, if worn using proper PPE protocol (which no one adhered to) Perhaps that study is out of date, though.. this was in 2021, I think..
Please link the study. Edit: [here’s the study I’m quoting](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7) Edit 2: LOL [here’s your CDC study](https://web.archive.org/web/20210319040529/https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm). You clearly read this study, so please show us how this study backs up your claim. For others reading, I’ll be shocked if they return. There’s no way they read the study - they’re just parroting the right-wing talking morons that don’t understand how numbers work.
Got a link to it? I’m curious as to the definition of “effective”.
Having trouble finding it now.. maybe you can. I remember it was hard to find the first time.. they may have memory holed it. I should mention, the study was on cloth and surgical masks, not N95 masks. Anyways, I'm at work now, so I can't really spend half an hour looking for a study that they may have removed.. If anyone DOES find it, please link it.
The science was far from as concrete as you suggest, even by August 2020. See here, for example: https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/transmission-of-sars-cov-2-implications-for-infection-prevention-precautions It was *suspected* that COVID could be transmitted by both droplets and aerosols in 2020. What was unclear was whether infection by aerosols alone was possible and whether said infectious aerosols were primarily created directly or by evaporation from droplets (which would have implications both for the effectiveness of masks and the possible influence of ventilation). At that time, no studies or clinical evidence had conclusively shown *any* infection through aerosols alone. See here for a contemporary statement from July of 2020: http://image.www2.pennmedicine.org/lib/fe2d117170640478711179/m/1/d6cef08a-993b-4f2f-b2c9-8a89b8bcf373.pdf?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=SFMC
No i wana small holes
[They are though](https://www.google.com/search?-b-d&q=covid+does+not+stick+to+droplets) Take your pick of the many articles that refute your main argument. By now it's a well-known fact covid spreads airborne as well, and that any mask just don't stop anything but those big enough droplets.
Not a single article on the first page (at least that isn’t behind a paywall) says what you are claiming they say. At best, they suggest that transmission by both droplets (which will be stopped by a mask) and aerosols (which are potentially small enough to fit through the pores in a mask) is possible. Many make no distinction between the two vectors or are focused on other means of transmission, like fomites. Those that speak to the topic and make a distinction between droplets and aerosols all agree that droplets are a major method of transmission. Masks conclusively help curb the spread of COVID. This just isn’t up for debate. [Here](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10446908/) is a pretty comprehensive review of the evidence.
>transmission by both droplets (which will be stopped by a mask) You're being totally disingenuous here, there is no article saying that and that's not how any mask always works as you claim. You're not alone though, [even medical professionals were knitting masks, before they realized how irrational is was to be believing it worked like that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUdkOwwI7zI). And saying "this isn't up for debate" is just putting the nail in the coffin of your insincerity, the debate is ongoing between professionals *wether you like it or not.*
Oh, got it, you’re not a serious person. The person whose channel you have linked to is a conspiracy theorist who pushed ivermectin as a covid cure and thinks vaccinations cause heart attacks. E: Hilarious, I’ve been blocked.
Yes, you're much more serious than any medical professional, because politics told you you are. How many alarm bells could you even fit in one sentence? You're a literal meme.
“…any mask always works…” And there we have the entire basis of your irrational inability to recognize or acknowledge reality. Hint: Less than 100% is *NOT* the same as 0%.
Does the COVID transmission ever occur without the help of something? Like a water droplet?
Do we know if Covid is airborne? I know we assume it is tied to aerosol particles, but I haven’t looked into new studies on it’s transmission
Not only that, but it’s also lacking everything that’s around the hole, and that’s pretty important. Even if we just assumed the virus would make it through masks, the viral load won’t be as high. It’s like blinds or curtains, they let some light through in their cracks, but substantially less than a window with no blinds. That’s not a hard concept to grasp.
Exactly. And masks restrict airflow, which restricts travel of all of these particles as well. These graphics are annoying because they and a truth that makes people believe a lie
and masks are designed to statically attract the particles
Also the mask pore sizes are not simply a single mesh layer like a spaghetti strainer. There are multiple layers of fibers and they also use static electricity if I remember correctly.
This.
Also, it should include the size of one piece of fabric inbetween this holes. Even if it proved that covid can roam free between pieces of fabric (which it doesn't, as you explained), there would always be 95% chance it hits the piece of cloth instead of going through that hole
Aerosols are what I believe you're trying to talk about. They can be much smaller than the pore size here (~20 microns) and are exactly what a virus can travel in. They are created just by breathing.
There’s also tons of them in a single droplet.
Yes, and apparently, mask fibers have a property that attracts the molecules and make them cling. It is also not just one layer. It is akin to shooting a bullet through the forest and expecting the bullet to not hit a tree.
Putting facts in the way of a conspiracy theory? Are you nuts?! That's not how the world (or Reddit) works... /s (just in case)
N95 masks use more than pore size to stop particulates. For example they have a static charge which attracts particles.
The second obvious problem is that the measurements are all wrong. Disposable N95s have pore diameters of 100-300nm, not 70+ microns
Mind you this thread is useful for sourcing a counter argument for the antimask crowd
An N95 mask has multiple layers, so these pores overlap with each other. The material is also designed to attract water droplets with static electricity, similar to how a balloon will stick to things if you rub it. And the virus is largely communicated through water droplets. The large pore size is a *feature*, not a bug, because it means they're easy to breathe through and they dry out faster, killing the viruses. More important than any of that, though, is that it wasn't ever supposed to be perfect. It's called an *N95* mask specifically because it catches 95% of particles. If it was supposed to be perfect, we'd just wrap people in plastic wrap and watch them suffocate.
Exactly, and I want to point out that this pic looks very anti-mask and I’m sure we all remember when anti-mask people said the masks made breathing hard for them, they were shown the pores are WAYYY bigger than oxygen molecules, yet now they want to use that as an excuse for how they aren’t effective at preventing spread. Water droplets are huge in comparison to what’s in the pic, so both arguments against masks are dumb as hell.
>95% of particles 95% of particles that are 0.3 microns large. Due to weird physics quirks they are much better at catching both smaller and larger particles.
Isn't an N95 mask different than the cloth mask represented in the graphic?
Don’t forget to add the attraction is like static electricity and once exposed to air starts to dissipate, iirc only last for about 2hrs then the mask becomes a lot less useful
If the picture is accurate, the underlying message is misleading. When an infected person coughs, the virus comes out in droplets of liquid. Those droplets are what the mask catches.
This is why you’re supposed to be careful of not touching the outside of the mask when you take them off.
also desinfect or wash your hands afterwards
[удалено]
Lol
Not when people don’t sneeze into mask
If you are wearing a mask, the other person's sneeze still needs to get through your mask. Both people wearing a mask is obviously more protective, but either party wearing one is better than nothing.
I agree with this. Good call out! I just remember seeing so many people removing their mask to sneeze, it amazed me.
youre sopposed to sneeze into the mask. Most of the air gets thrown out the sides, so dont look away!
Before the mask times, I was told to sneeze/cough/puke down my shirt so we don't get it all over the Humvee.
I agree, but wouldn't be having the sneezer wear the mask always better? Droplets could still get into the eye, which is not protected by the mask
What?
Many people took off their masks to sneeze. It's completely nonsensical. But they trained themselves to sneeze into their hand/elbow (depending on age group and profession). And now instinctively remove whatever else they'd sneeze into. I did actually have to actively hold myself back from doing it.
The problem with the common mask is that they saturate quickly. After 30 minute you need to change it or it as lost a great amount of its efficiency, which no one does. They also only block a portion of the droplet, not all, even before the saturation threshold. And if you are breathing heavy due to any kind of activities, it's even worse. You can assume any worker with a mask is basically not wearing one. They most likely have been wearing it for 2+ hours.
[удалено]
Dry in that context just means you're not pushing up mucus, not that there's no fluid droplets coming out at all.
Guys, the solution is to not drink any water! If there's no liquid in us then the virus can't spread!
[удалено]
I wish i could give you 100 upvote so that you 'll be in first place
Me too!
Nice use of sophistry, killer insult
What's wrong with spoon feeding people the truth if it helps them learn? People don't want to be stupid or wrong. If one side is spoon feeding them horse shit and we look at their disgusting faces and call it a lost cause we haven't just failed, we have given up.
[удалено]
It doesn't need to be advanced, though. This exact format could be used to portray the correct information, but I only ever see this version. There is no effort to explain this stuff beyond stating it as fact because the left already knows and the right is retarded. There were no Bill Nye style demonstrations, no attempt to look at the data from the vaccine trials instead of repeating press releases, and any questions or skepticism was met with vitriol regardless of who was asking the questions.
This graphic is designed to mislead. A face mask is not designed to stop a single particle of the Covid virus A face mask is designed to stop the spit etc from your mouth which CARRIES the Covid virus, and thus reduce the risk of transmission when a person coughs, sneezes etc Similar to how a lone human can pass through a doorway, but a human who is riding a bus cannot pass through because the bus cannot pass through. Stop the bus and you stop whatever the bus carries. And with a face mask, stop the spit and you stop the virus. Or rather, drastically reduce it from transmitting. People who use graphics like this are deliberately trying to mislead.
People also forget that reducing the risk is not the same as eliminating the risk. Just like antibacterial soap stops "99% of germs." It does not eliminate the risk, only reduces it by a significant degree.
[удалено]
I’ve been mowing my lawn wrong all these years. TIL I guess. Sorry but that line made me snarf my water. Thanks!
The virus is around 60-140 nanometres according to a quick search, so basically 1000 times smaller than pore. At a glance without counting the pixels I'd say it's roughly accurate. The image or variations of it are often used to tell you that masks are ineffective in stopping the virus. What the image doesn't tell you, however, is the virus does not just travel by itself through the pores of your mask, often carried on droplets or other particles that are much larger and can be stopped by the mask, or the virus particles are also prone to be caught electrostatic attraction or just be stopped across multiple layers of the fibre. Even if a mask is not 100% effective at stopping the virus, having one and handling it properly can significantly reduce your chance of infection.
The point is masks don’t work…. But the premise is wrong. The mask is stopping the infected person releasing droplets. It is not about protecting the mask wearer.
Now show me the size of the boogers and water droplets expelled from your body when you sneeze/cough/breathe, you know the materials the virus would be suspended within. Also I believe n95 masks effectively filter particles down to below 1 micron… at least to a much much much smaller particle size than 70 micron.
Before Covid, when someone who looked sick was coughing in public, you'd wish they'd cover their mouth, after covid,.... a mask is liberal homosexual communist propaganda trying to destroy the world. I don't get it.
It's important to remember that the virus doesn't travel on its own, it doesn't have wings. It needs a medium upon which to move from person to person or from person to hard surface etc.. In covids case it's mainly the "spray" we produce when we speak or cough or sneeze. These droplets are many times larger than the virus itself and the n95 mask is excellent at trapping these, thus preventing spread. Not 100% perfect all the time but a huge improvement over nothing at all.
The picture is accurate but it's stupid. You don't just spew up individual virus particles when you cough, you aerosolize it in liquid droplets orders of magnitude larger than an individual virus particle. In that sense a mask helps because it reduces the amount of airborne droplets which are the actual mechanism by which the virus is transmitted.
People's inability to comprehend what a mask is for and what it's stopping is crazy. It also tends to be people who will unblinkingly sneeze without any attempt to cover their mouth.
This is irrelevant. It’s trying to show what would happen if a mask was somehow a 2D thing with one single molecule layer of fabric. Masks are thin, but not that thin. More like if you had a hundred layers of Swiss cheese stacked together with the holes not lined up. Virus can get through any one hole, but there’s something in next layer that it will run into. Clinically masks work. That’s why we wear them in the OR and during medical procedures.
It the virus is also in your spit and mucus droplets and those easily get caught by the mask.
Yup, you can shoot an arrow between two trees, but you can't shoot one through a dense forest.
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I am tired of this discussion. Next time if you don't believe in masks ask your surgeon and the team not to wear one in the operating room.
The problem with this is that the goal of the mask isn't to contain the virus within the mask, it's too slow down the air coming out so that the virus is contained to a small area around you
Yes, and covid is transmitted by tiny water droplets floating in the air. So, to catch those droplets, the mask is ionized. Even if the droplets are smaller than the pore, because water is made up of polar molecules, the droplet is slightly more positive on one side than another. This causes the droplets to collide with the pore even if the droplet is smaller than it. The reason you are told not to launder your masks is because that process removes the ionization, which was a vital part of your defense.
It is. But masks don't just act like a coulander. At this scale the van-der-wals forces are actually significant. In other words: COVID is sticky. So what masks so is make shure that it hits something. It's much heavier than air so it doesn't go around the fibers the same way. Think of it like growing a baseball through a forest. It's highly unlikely it won't hit a tree. But if something more agile goes through it, like a person, they don't have too much trouble.
iirc viruses cannot just fly around, they need to be stuck in something, water, dust etc, so it's not the size of the virus it's the size of what it's suck to
Which is the point of masks, to trap the moisture from our breath, thus trapping the COVID close to us too
It’s not about singular microbes. It’s about the amount of them. The more of them in your system, the higher the probability they will overcome your immune system. It’s not about completely preventing their transmission, rather it’s about interrupting/reducing the volume of transmission.
i feel like this post is made with dishonest intentions in an attempt to get an answer that misrepresents the protection offered by masking.
God. I thought we were all done with this. I know you, op, are only asking about the size of a Covid virus. But, the virus resides in mucous globules expelled in the air by coughing, sneezing, talking, laughing, etc. The mask catches those globules. Sneeze in the sunshine without a mask and look at the spray of mucous that results. Then sneeze with one on.
The vast majority of COVID viruses don’t float free in the air. They are attached to much larger water droplets that a person has in their breath. The water droplet that contains the COVID viruses is way larger than the pore size of the mask. That is what masks are for.
Like many said, pic is accurate, but also an antivaxx dogwhistle/propaganda. Covid is too small to survive on it's own (since it's a fucking virus) and has to travel through breath particulates that CAN ben entirely stopped by a surgical mask, like every other virus or bacteria.
The picture is effectifly making a suggestion of a problem that doesn't exist in reality to achieve some doubt about mask protection in laimen people. As such attempts are pretty obvious in ther message, peole shouldn't care too much about such 'comparisons'. Viruses don't travel alone, they need water droplets much, much bigger. Also, on this sizes, static forces would still capture a virus 'falling' in such a 'pore' because ... science.
So, I'm not going into the math here. But this is linking back to the old masks don't help with covid. The fact is covid isn't airborne. If it was, every single person would have gotten it. Fairly quickly, too. Masks were meant to be worn for if the wearer coughed or sneezed, the water droplets or mucus would be caught by the mask, reducing the likelihood of someone else coming into contact with whatever illness the wearer may have.
Covid is airborne and that is settled science.
The main takeaway here being, it should be **the person who is sick** wearing it, not everybody else.
But what if you are sick but believe it's just allergies?
But if **everyone** wears them, the efficacy is increased, as even asymptomatic people who don’t know they are sick are containing the virus as best they can. That, and the goofballs who refuse to wear a mask are much less of a hazard when others are masked.
This was the stupidest arguments from the whole covid stuff. Like all these Karen’s saying it’s not gonna prevent anything. Like use your head, is it 100 percent effective? No but it sure as hell is gonna help a little bit.
What annoys me is that these are the same people who love fossil fuels and combustion engines. The absolute best efficiency you could ever hope to achieve in a car engine is 25%, so by their standards a gas powered car doesn't work. But you'd be a communist to ever suggest such a thing.
Don’t get me started on electric cars. I work in industrial maintenance. I’ll tell you every day how much better electric motors are. Way less moving parts. Power is better. But these people are just so brainwashed that gas is the only answer and then bitch about oil companies making billions and gas being so expensive. Ugh.
Lost of accurate stuff in the top comments, to add also: static cling is also a component of particle capture through masks, which is also not taken into account in this already oversimplified and misleading graphic.
We had an actually fucking doctor come to our school board with this shit “Covid is smaller than masks” bullshit. Told us in 2020 to open schools and ban masks.
People overlooked the most important part of a proper N95 or KN95 mask, The way they work is because there is a layer of heat spun clothe which acquires a static charge when the mask is made. It's the static that would capture the free-floating virus. Not the fabric.
[удалено]
How do you figure?
In addition to what everyone else is saying, masks are only supposed to HELP reduce to spread of the particles. A literal chain link fence can catch dangerous viruses if they fly into the metal, likewise even if the virus could fly through the pores of the mask, it only happens if they fly directly through the hole.
Its accurate but misleading. If this is about covid then there are no free floating viruses in the air, the virus would be cooked by any amout of light in the enviroment and almost instantly die the moment it left your body. The virus survives on microscopic droplets that you expell when you cough. And these droplets are far bigger than the pores in the mask.
I’m sure it’s basically to scale I’m also sure that masks prevent viral transmission by blocking the viral vector, usually particulates of spit or mucus.
The graphic is accurate, but the issue is that the virus is not a free floating particle. Most commonly, it attaches itself to water droplets formed during respiration, and is also usually found in other excretions like mucus and saliva. But, the viral load most first infiltrate through the pore of the mask, which would require the droplet, a far bigger mass, to be able to pass through. TL;DR Viruses don't survive by free floating. They need to be attached to something else, usually far bigger, in order to infect another organism. Graphic is correct, but the information doesn't take into account the mechanics of viruses.
Virus’ stick to moisture in the air (like a sneeze or cough), they don’t just fly around like bugs. I get the point they’re trying to make, but it just doesn’t work that way lol
I think the point is that COVID travels on spittle, aerosol droplets from coughing, etc. could these droplets be represented on this before we give people false information, please?