Jump to content

Recommended Posts

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/26/non-woven-masks-better-to-stop-covid-19-says-japanese-supercomputer


Remember that masks help, especially these, but all face coverings don?t magic the virus away completely. Staying away from others and washing hands (or never ever putting fingers to mouth, eyes, nostrils, ear holes) would work most effectively. Wash your face covering or mask (woven ? cotton, linen, etc.) and dispose effectively and safe,6 of the non-woven ones after a day?s use.

Being in a closed, poorly ventilated space at close quarters with others, all or mostly unmasked, is a good way of increasing your chance of getting infected.

I?m not a medic so I?m using common sense and the knowledge I have.

Here is the Daily Mail article, quite useful for everyday COVID use:


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8682297/How-virus-proof-mask-laboratory-conditions-professor-answers-burning-question.html



If you want to scare yourself silly then here is an article from (a relatively sane) US prepper site which covers heavyweight respirators, etc. Their research seems pretty good:


https://theprepared.com/gear/reviews/best-gas-mask-respirator-survival/

which are the best ones for protecting ourselves against getting Covid which are available to the general public?


The ones being worn by people in your vicinity. You are less likely to inhale Covid-19 particles than you are to transfer them to you on your hands - hence the emphasis on hand washing. Doctors and nurses in full PPE were still catching the virus - suggesting that even the best PPE may not be sufficient. Social distancing, hand-washing and others wearing masks (as well as you, for them) are the 'best' methods. Staying 2 metres from people indoors, and ensuring if you can that there is good ventilation (but autumn and winter are close upon us) is your best defence.


Doctors and nurses even with PPE couldn't social distance with their patients - and wards are generally poorly ventilated (air conditioning is no good for this).

The World Economic Forum link below features a study of different mask materials and their effectiveness. Surprisingly, "vacuum cleaner bag" is up there with the best. I bought some cheaper ones to cut up and use as filters in cotton masks (in the pocket).


https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/covid19-coronavirus-infection-protection-mask-material/

I am in favour of masks, and in fact double up with scarf over top.

but they buy these masks, and only token wear them

either balance them on chin or just cover mouth,

leaving nose completely uncovered.

I dont think we stand a chance with this selfish attitude

whatever decent mask we buy

  • 3 weeks later...

As far as I know, masks labeled N95 are probably the best type available to the public. They filter 95% of particles down to 0.3 microns (small enough to include viral aerosol particles). Don't use a mask with an exhalation valve as your breath comes out unfiltered and you do not protect anyone else. I've just been wearing disposable N95 dust masks.


For self-protection, seal is important. Some people's masks look quite loose. The gaps on the sides of the nose are points where air can get in, so masks with metal strips over the nose are good or a mask which comes high up. You can buy bags of nose strips on Amazon that can be sewn onto fabric masks if they don't have them. You'll probably never get a perfect seal, but personally I like to see the mask move in and out when I breath. I think this indicates that not much unfiltered air is being sucked in. Also, I check how much the smell of perfume spray is blocked.


I've just read that one test is to try and blow out a lighted match - it shouldn't be easy.

lameduck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am in favour of masks, and in fact double up

> with scarf over top.

> but they buy these masks, and only token wear

> them

> either balance them on chin or just cover mouth,

> leaving nose completely uncovered.

> I dont think we stand a chance with this selfish

> attitude

> whatever decent mask we buy


yup totally agree!

I'm so over people just either not wearing them on public transport and in shops or just wearing them with their noses sticking out or on their chins.

people really do need to grow up and take responsibility for all our sakes.

Naiada Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've read through all the above comments - if

> anyone has a link to any online site selling

> reusable N99 + N95 masks that would be helpful as

> I can only find disposable ones ....


I was looking for the same thing. But it seems N95/N99 filters are not available for reusable masks.


You can get fabric reusable masks with pockets to insert filters - but the only available filters are labelled PM2.5. I assume they are not quite as effective (2.5 microns is quite a bit larger than the 0.3 microns N95 masks are able to block) however, I believe they still give a reasonable degree of protection.


I'm afraid I don't have any reccomendations as I am reusing N95 dust masks while I am deciding which reusable one to get myself. But while looking around I came across these two which both have built in filters (filtering >90% of 3 micron particles):


https://www.vistaprint.co.uk/masks/all/adults/

https://www.boobalou.co.uk/100-organic-cotton-3-layer-face-mask.html


They are not perfect as I believe virus aerosol particles can go down to 1 micron in size. But I think that is why it is important for everyone to wear masks. It is easier to stop the particles when they are still large which is just after they have left someones mouth, than later on when they have broken down and got smaller.

  • 2 weeks later...
Masks help and they also give a sense of solidarity etc. If you?re on a bus or train, or in a car with people unknown to you or not in your bubble, open the windows. Fresh (even the kind we get here) air helps dilute the concentration of aerosols and other particles in the air. Too many buses are rolling around all tightly sealed. Do your bit!
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

N95, KN95 are disposable masks and cannot be rewashed and/or reused. Treat them with the same logic like you would an air purifier, you will eventually have to replace. Most disposable masks are good for 9-10 hour continuous wear, so no removal otherwise put on another fresh mask and always keep a spare sealed in your bag if you're on the go. Your mask should not be sticking to your nose at every inhale, which many of these homemade masks that are made, are guilty of.


Most of these masks that are being created off the back of COVID hitting us are pretty much only "fashion masks" (unlike in East and South East Asia where they are very common since SARS so are developed to include the replaceable filter holder within the masks). With that being said, any covering such as cotton is better than nothing if that's all you have. But I agree with the other comments stating that hand washing as super important, masks alone do not prevent you from contracting the virus but it will help shield you more so. Just keep your distance, wash your hands, don't go crazy on the sanitiser if you wash your hands well enough you don't want to kill your good bacteria, wear your mask properly and stay home if you have symptoms.


And to those who disagree with mask wearing, fair enough but respect businesses, staff and those in our community that follow it because of the law, because of the vulnerable people they live with and their own health. If you don't want to wear a mask, then don't put others at risk by going into their establishment.


Take care!

Most disposable masks are good for 9-10 hour continuous wear, so no removal otherwise put on another fresh mask and always keep a spare sealed in your bag if you're on the go.


More frequent mask changing is required of NHS staff who are treating known (or suspected) Covid patients. And in A&E staff will change masks between patients as required. 'Civilian' usages however can well go as described.


The major benefit of mask wearing is so you can protect others - on the assumption that you have it, but are asymptomatic. That's why if everyone wears masks when in relatively close contact indoors everyone's chances of contracting it are reduced (because everyone's chances of spreading it are also reduced).

  • 2 weeks later...

elloriac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which magazine tested commercially available

> reusable masks, they've made the article available

> to everyone, not just subscribers

> https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/face-masks/article

> /best-reusable-face-masks-awLeA3A6XoZD/


Sorry, but the Which report is of little value as it fails to make a scientific analysis.


An official grading system for masks already exists. It is outlined here..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFP_standards

Frankly, unless you are wearing full surgical barrier equipment (hospital grade mask, screen face protector etc., and change these no more than 4 hours after first use) then you will find little that protects you - why we are asked to wear masks is to protect others, if we have (asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic) Covid-19 - as the mask will substantially reduce the infected spray droplets we breathe out. Any mask you are wearing where you can't blow out a candle flame will certainly be quite effective - which probably means two or more ply, with or without an additional filter (which can just be a folded paper tissue).
  • 3 weeks later...

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

. Any mask you are wearing where you

> can't blow out a candle flame will certainly be

> quite effective - which probably means two or more

> ply, with or without an additional filter


Your "candle test" is highly misleading and outright dangerous. You could have a mask that is so thick and impenetrable that you could never blow out a candle. In that case, it restricts the air too much and so you are actually breathing air that comes in round the edges of the mask, ie air that is not filtered.


The only effective mask is one that fits closely all round the face -especially over the bridge of the nose. That way all the air your breath is filtered by the layers of mask rather than coming in round the edges.


Masks are graded. Do not risk anything less than PP2 (also known as N95). PP3 is best.


The "candle bowing" thing is classic fake news. Sadly also, lots of people have jumped on the bandwagon offering home made cloth masks than frankly are totally USELESS.


Every one should do thorough research rather than believe in hearsay!

In that case, it restricts the air too much and so you are actually breathing air that comes in round the edges of the mask, ie air that is not filtered.


I would not (I do not) wear a mask to protect myself, but to protect others, should I be an asymptomatic carrier. Outside of hospital conditions I would not expect 'normal' PPE to be doubling as a hazmat suit. It appears you are advocating wearing masks as a protection to you - not to others. I would not do that - and if people believe that their masks will be protecting them (again, outside a hospital situation with full PPE) then they are misleading themselves. Remember if you are going down that route that you should change and dispose of your mask every 4 hours for it to offer you any safety, wear disposable aprons or gowns so your clothes aren't contaminated etc.


Your derided candle test at least shows that the mask you are wearing will help stop, or at least diminish, the contaminated spray from your nose and mouth. Frankly I would not be relying on any mask, but social distancing, short contact times and others wearing masks, for my own protection.

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> I would not (I do not) wear a mask to protect

> myself, but to protect others, should I be an

> asymptomatic carrier. Outside of hospital

> conditions I would not expect 'normal' PPE to be

> doubling as a hazmat suit. It appears you are

> advocating wearing masks as a protection to you -

> not to others. I would not do that - and if people

> believe that their masks will be protecting them

> (again, outside a hospital situation with full

> PPE) then they are misleading themselves.


> Your derided candle test at least shows that the

> mask you are wearing will help stop, or at least

> diminish, the contaminated spray from your nose

> and mouth. Frankly I would not be relying on any

> mask, but social distancing, short contact times

> and others wearing masks, for my own protection.


I most certainly do wear a mask to protect myself. If I protect myself and do not get infected then I cannot possibly pass it on to someone else whether they are in my immediate family or not. This consideration is further reinforced because my spouse and I are both in a vulnerable demographic.


To enhance this protection, we both strictly observe the need to maintain social distancing, short contact time etc etc. And yes, if one spends protracted time in a high risk environment, then the mask should be discarded after 4 hours. At a retail price of about ?9 each for a decent mask, it becomes an expensive business.


From a purely logical point of view, it make no sense to have a mask that is a barrier rather than a filter. A mask is only effective if it actually FILTERS the air and this can only be done by trapping the virus particles within the layers of fabric. This is precisely why the best masks are made from non-woven material. Woven fabrics have gaps between treads that virus particles can easily pass through.


But don't just take my word, here is what the Gruniad said https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/26/non-woven-masks-better-to-stop-covid-19-says-japanese-supercomputer.


If you have a largely impenetrable fabric barrier then the incoming and outgoing air will pass around the perimeter of the mask i.e. it will follow the path of least resistance. This is also why front-line NHS staff receive detailed training on how to fit masks properly.


I'm quite happy to pay ?9 for a decent (scientifically proven) mask rather than rely on some speculation about blowing out candles. ?9 is a reasonable insurance premium.

  • 2 weeks later...

We wear masks to protect others, to reduce likelihood of droplets reaching them. Blowing out a candle is a good measure.


Government advice is the best place to go for information

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own


Medical masks are there for a different purpose ie protecting those on the front line, again good government advice

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/regulatory-status-of-equipment-being-used-to-help-prevent-coronavirus-covid-19?utm_source=Gov&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=MHRA_COVID-19_updates&utm_content=HCP7#face-masks-and-face-coverings


extracting from this: Face coverings intended for use by the general public are not PPE or medical devices. As such they do not carry a CE mark and should not be sold or donated as PPE or medical devices.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...