N95 vs paint mask

gee....for a moment I thought I was on the Bonanza board with all the epidemiologist doctors. o_O
 
PPC1052 said:
True. But the key word is "tend." As in, not "inexorably." This virus is spread through aerosolized particles that are much smaller and travel farther. So, yes, they provide some protection, but are not absolute.
Click to expand...
Perfection is not an attainable goal in any endeavor.
 
PPC1052 said:
True. But the key word is "tend." As in, not "inexorably." This virus is spread through aerosolized particles that are much smaller and travel farther. So, yes, they provide some protection, but are not absolute.
Click to expand...

From most of the data available, there is little evidence that aerosol spread is a major factor in the community. The bulk of spread is via person to person contact and through droplet spread. In the healthcare setting, particularly an ICU, where you perform procedures that can create aerosoles (suctioning, bronchoscopy, ventilation equipment using aerosol generators), aerosol spread is a concern and the hospitals that have enough PPE available treat it as an airborne agent for that reason.

In a lab setting, a group has demonstrated that they can retrieve 'viable' virus from an artificially created aerosol after 8hrs, they have also shown virus on things like cardboard boxes and on hard surfaces. There is a difference between an experimental setting where you can simply prove presence of the particle and actually proving that this is a vector for transmission in the community.

The reaction to that NEJM paper about the aerosol experiments reminded me of one of the 'outbreak' or 'hotzone' movies where suddenly everyone panics 'IT HAS GONE AIRBORNE!!!!!!'
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
https://www.quora.com/Is-70-or-90-isopropyl-alcohol-better-for-disinfecting

google is your friend pal....
Click to expand...
First off, since when was Quora a legitimate source?
Secondly, if you actually read all the comments, the information about coagulation of proteins applies only to bacteria and not viruses. The only times viruses are mentioned state that the coagulation effects do not apply to viruses and high concentrations are just as good for killing them. Plus there is also a curve showing that high concentrations of alcohol/water above 70% are actually less volatile than lower ones.

So you know what....reading is your friend. If you are going to use Quora as a source, then you have to read all the comments below the question.
 
CDC explains how alcohol kills germs, and why 60-90% is optimal, and 100% is less effective:

The most feasible explanation for the antimicrobial action of alcohol is denaturation of proteins. This mechanism is supported by the observation that absolute ethyl alcohol, a dehydrating agent, is less bactericidal than mixtures of alcohol and water because proteins are denatured more quickly in the presence of water​

More on denatured proteins on Wikipedia.
 
flyingron said:
The big key is to have it fitted properly. It does no good if the mask is gapping along the sides and allowing the droplets in or out rather than being filtered through the mask.
Click to expand...

Worth saying again. A very large percentage of folks I see wearing a mask are wearing them wrong. And the kids that are wearing them play with the mask, putting their fingers under the mask...

Also, It does no good to cut a slit in the mask so a cigarette will go through, which I saw a person doing this morning....:dunno:
 
The mask only gives you a false sense of security if your not wearing eye protection.
 
weilke said:
Btw. If you wear a respirator, make sure you understand how to don and doff it without transferring substances from your potentially contaminated hands to your nose, eyes or lips. There is a system to it. If you dont have the facilities to do that, wearing a respirator may not give you a net benefit.

Oh, and surgical masks are not designed to protect the surgeon/scrub-tech/scrub-RN against aerosols. They are worn to protect the surgical field from contamination by spittle from the surgical team and to protect the surgical team from drops of blood that may be created during a procedure (e.g. during suturing, if there is a 'bleeder' or when the surgeon fires a surgical stapler). They make some sense to put on a coughing patient to keep them from throwing droplets 1/2 way across the room. The cough will still create droplets but now they stay slightly closer to the coughing patient.
Click to expand...

That’s why Mayo put me under and I tubated me for a simple outpatient scope procedure. They were protecting their pulmonary Docs. They stuffed the O2 mask over my face the second I was rolled into the OR and three or four minutes later had me out. No coughing patient that way.

Zeldman said:
Worth saying again. A very large percentage of folks I see wearing a mask are wearing them wrong. And the kids that are wearing them play with the mask, putting their fingers under the mask...

Also, It does no good to cut a slit in the mask so a cigarette will go through, which I saw a person doing this morning....:dunno:
Click to expand...

A friend saw two guys in a rusty pickup wearing respirators and tyvek suits and gloves go into a grocery store, come back, load all the stuff into the cab, not bed, then get in and after touching everything... took the respirators off and rubbed their sweaty faces and eyes with the gloves still on.

LOL LOL LOL.
 
Matthew Rogers said:
First off, since when was Quora a legitimate source?
Secondly, if you actually read all the comments, the information about coagulation of proteins applies only to bacteria and not viruses. The only times viruses are mentioned state that the coagulation effects do not apply to viruses and high concentrations are just as good for killing them. Plus there is also a curve showing that high concentrations of alcohol/water above 70% are actually less volatile than lower ones.

So you know what....reading is your friend. If you are going to use Quora as a source, then you have to read all the comments below the question.
Click to expand...

Well, you have to give him credit for keeping that shovel going.

My wife and mother-in-law keep showing me absolutely stupid claims that they have received in text messages from friends or read on the internet. This guy named "Someone" is apparently one smart sonofabitch, because most of the information quotes him as the source.
 
Palmpilot said:
How high does the proof need to be to kill the virus?
Click to expand...

70% alcohol, which is I guess 140 proof. You have to have a high enough concentration of alcohol to dissolve lipids out of the viral envelope. Ethyl or isopropyl alcohol is fine. Avoid methanol or denatured alcohol (which may contain high concentrations of methanol) as methanol can be quite toxic if ingested or inhaled in sufficient quantities. Ethanol is pretty safe as you can drink the stuff. (To a point.)
 
Rubbing alcohol, which is mostly isopropyl, should be fine... but in most places it seems to be unobtainium, due to panic buying. :(
 
You must have really crappy rubbing alcohol, if it is mostly water. The stuff around here is 70%. Denatured and methanol is fine for cleaning. It evaporates fast and unless you're drinking the stuff, you'll not have problems.

I have some faux-moonshine (it's soldfrom a liquor store in a mason jar, produced by Heaven Hills, someone gave it to me) that I might use. I've got some better white dog but I'm saving that to drink.
 
I think the mask prevents aerosol spray, so they’re not to protect the mask wearer, but others around them. Like the masks surgeons wear, they protect the patient from the surgeon, not the other way around.

Also I bet a naked virus will die relatively quickly, but one inside a protective phlegm bubble last many times longer.


Tom
 
flyingron said:
You must have really crappy rubbing alcohol, if it is mostly water. The stuff around here is 70%. Denatured and methanol is fine for cleaning. It evaporates fast and unless you're drinking the stuff, you'll not have problems.

I have some faux-moonshine (it's soldfrom a liquor store in a mason jar, produced by Heaven Hills, someone gave it to me) that I might use. I've got some better white dog but I'm saving that to drink.
Click to expand...
Yup. I've never seen rubbing alcohol that wasn't well over 50% isopropyl - 70% is typical. Always a good idea to read the label first though.
 
peace....I guess I got my wires crossed. Hydrogen Peroxide is the one with the low percentage.
 
Retail hydrogen peroxide is very weak and you want it to be. The first aid stuff is only about 1.5%. You can get food grade stuff at 3%, maybe 5%, but you won't find it in except from specialty suppliers. You need 3% to be effective at killing COVID if you want to do that. Actually, regular clorox, works at much safer dilution, and even just plain soap is probably less of a bother.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top