Hard to parse limited and somewhat contradictory research. Harm reduction is not a meaningless strategy. While people crowd in a COSTCO masks will probably provide incomplete protection, but in many cases with education, controls, protocols to doff and clean it seems worthwhile.
-
-
The parallels here really bug me. If you won't teach someone how to obtain, maintain, and use a mask and then call mask-wearing ineffective, you're not far off the mark from the folks who do the same with condoms and tout the "improper use" stats.
-
The literature is just that. For 20 years everyone is writing we should run good experiments and design good cloth masks to test, but no one did. This was considered technology only the poor needed, so no one funded the research. Who is the you in your statement?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Sure, but the condom is a technology designed to be a prophylactic device, the cloth mask researchers (the Cambridge study) were running a proof of concept experiment with cloth scraps from home. These studies did not employ seamstresses and fiber engineers.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Also air purifier entrepreneur and lots of DIYers is not a robust “literature” on anything. I’ve read it too, people are making shit up. One study refers to tea towel fabric, which is not a thing. None cite the normal classifications for fabric.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sheep skin condoms are literally porous.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.