Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
"This may be bollocks, but it's lovely bollocks."

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.



Bleating sheep facemask

  (+6, -3)
(+6, -3)
  [vote for,

A mask for the lower half of the human face, made from a hypoallergenic elastomer, and shaped and coloured to make the wearer look to some extent like a sheep.

Has an elasticated strap to hold it against the wearer’s face, and two simple low-restriction valves – inlet, and outlet – but no filtration. The outlet valve feeds through a noisemaking device, which produces the characteristic sheep “bleating” noise when the wearer exhales.

Wear it as an ironic statement, to send up the mindless herds of mask-wearing morons who think that a mask that doesn’t seal, and that doesn’t cover the mucous membranes of the eye, will somehow protect them and others.

8th of 7, Jan 10 2021

NPC facemask https://www.ebay.co...ztW7-oaAlPWEALw_wcB
[Voice, Jan 10 2021]

Foot Mask https://sodabred.tu.../640012720858611712
[xenzag, Jan 11 2021]

Masks https://www.google....AMoQ3bBo7Vhfhr4LBQ1
A starting point ... [8th of 7, Jan 11 2021]

https://fingertips....england-latest.html [hippo, Jan 11 2021]

Impeachment in the UK https://en.wikipedi..._the_United_Kingdom
I'm not sure if this is any better or worse than the US version ... [kdf, Jan 11 2021]

The objective is to get the R number below '1' https://www.healthl...reproduction-number
[AusCan531, Jan 13 2021]

An in-depth study of masks using advanced modeling https://www.ncbi.nl...rticles/PMC7301882/
Yes, they do help. [RayfordSteele, Jan 13 2021]


       Baaaaaaahhhhhhh [+]
xenzag, Jan 10 2021

       //[...] that doesn’t cover the mucous membranes of the eye, will somehow protect them and others//   

       Unless you sneeze out of your eyes, a mask that doesn't cover your eyes can still provide at least some protection for others from you. However, I admit that this would be relevant only if you were interested in the safety of others.
pertinax, Jan 11 2021

       Face shield with INGSOC logo perhaps.
sninctown, Jan 11 2021

       See link to illustration/idea I created several weeks ago. It's not a sheep!
xenzag, Jan 11 2021

       //this would be relevant only if you were interested in the safety of others// - and *reducing* the risk to yourself; just because a mask isn't a top-spec medical-grade full-face covering, it doesn't mean it's not providing some useful protection.
hippo, Jan 11 2021

       It makes, on average, an 8% difference (the error bars on the study were ± 4%). And that's when the mask wearer uses them properly.   

       A properly fitted mask, used as part of a PPE protocol along with decontamination procedures, does indeed make a big difference. But the vast majority of the bleating sheep have absolutely no idea of how to do that, so why bother ?   

       // this would be relevant only if you were interested in the safety of others. //   

       What at truly surreal concept.   

       // Face shield with INGSOC logo perhaps. //   

       Nice, you should post that ...
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       “It makes, on average, an 8% difference (the error bars on the study were ± 4%). And that's when the mask wearer uses them properly.”
-8th of 7, Jan 11 21

       Link to “the study,” please?
kdf, Jan 11 2021

       Not always.   

       Manfred Werner once described NATO as "A sixteen inch manhole cover for an eighteen inch manhole".   

       Half a loaf can indeed be better than no bread, but sometimes it merely prolongs the moment at which you starve to death. A lot of the time, things need to be fully functional (parachutes, lifejackets, SCUBA sets and such) or they're not only worthless, but may lead you to make inappropriate decisions with bad outcomes.
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       Seconding the request for the study.   

       On this topic I'm having a very difficult time getting good statistics about covid. There are arguments that alleged covid deaths are actually misreported flu, aging, etc deaths. The only way to tell is to compare the numbers in absolute terms. So if flu, other lung conditions, aging related problems, lung cancer, etc deaths all fell enough in absolute terms over what's normal to make up the covid numbers, then it's more than fishy. If flu, etc numbers are normal in absolute terms and covid deaths are in addition to that then the deaths are being reported accurately.   

       But all I can find on the interwebs are causes of death in relative terms, which is useless for this.
Voice, Jan 11 2021


       "It is clear from the literature that masks are only one component of a complex intervention which must also include eye protection, gowns, behavioural measures to support proper doffing and donning, and general infection control measures. "   

       That's just the start point and refers mostly to HCWs. Further links will be added as time permits.
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       8th, you’re gonna die eventually anyhow - why are you still bothering to breathe? The same is true for all of us, of course. My answer is that I’m in no hurry to go - what’s yours?   

       Re study you posted, being "just the start point and refers mostly to HCWs" - thank you for acknowledging that it addresses a completely different setting that the original suggestion (protecting clinical staff in primary care settings - vs effectiveness of reducing spread among the population at large).   

       Let me know when you have something relevant to the public setting and containing the figures you gave earlier - which do not appear in the study you linked.
kdf, Jan 11 2021

       // why are you still bothering to breathe? //   

       To spread doom, gloom, alarm and despondency, and indulge in bitter misanthropic gloating, of course. Why, do you have a different reason ?   

       // all I can find on the interwebs are causes of death in relative terms, which is useless for this //   

       A very recent statistic released by the ONS in the UK is the total registered deaths from all causes in England and Wales for 2020, from all causes. It's about 660K, and up only slightly on 2019 (links to exact figures follow) - about 2%   

       That means that no-one has died who was not expected to die.
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       "No-one has died who was not expected to die."
—8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       As previously noted, everybody is expected to die. It's just a matter of how and when.   

       "To spread doom, gloom, alarm and despondency, and indulge in bitter misanthropic gloating, of course."

       Everybody needs a hobby, I guess. Carry on.
kdf, Jan 11 2021

       We regard it more as a vocation, actually ...
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       //no-one has died who was not expected to die// There have been 69,925 'excess deaths' in the UK since 21 March 2020 (see link).
hippo, Jan 11 2021

       70k/660k = 10.6%, and that's only since March 2020.   

       The numbers vary up to 5% from year to year; it's statistically significant, but only just. Nothing to be excited or worried about.   

       2000 610k
2003 612k
2011 552k
2015 603k
2018 616k

       Those figures aren't corrected for population growth; they're simple the "total deaths", which will increase anyway with increasing population.   

       Besides, 69K out of 67 million ? That's 0.102%, and right on the money for the predicted attrition rate. A population of 67 million can sustain a loss of 0.1% without noticing.   

       On 01 July 1916, the British Army lost over 19,000 young, fit, healthy males IN A SINGLE DAY. The original 14th. C Black Death pandemic killed over 30% of the general population.   

       Get a sense of proportion ...
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       I think 8th should be impeached - for no other reasons than to annoy him and to amuse me, both of which are very good reasons. Everyone's getting impeached these days. It's popular, so there's no need to alienate 8th.
xenzag, Jan 11 2021

       //it's statistically significant, but only just// - that's almost [8th] admitting he was wrong!
hippo, Jan 11 2021

       Impeachable offences.
xenzag, Jan 11 2021

       Class, repeat after me: "8th is never wrong."   

       By constantly changing the context, he will always right about whatever it is he's talking about at the moment. Review the drift of this thread for examples.
kdf, Jan 11 2021

       That's also an impeachment issue.
xenzag, Jan 11 2021

       The last attempted impeachment in the UK occurred in 1848 ... and some legal authorities, such as Halsbury's Laws of England, consider it now to be probably obsolete (link). Though I have no stake in how you run your kingdom, may I at least suggest you choose some equally obsolete form of punishment if you can get a conviction?   

       If it provides enough public spectacle, you might be able to sell tickets.
kdf, Jan 11 2021

       How about being made do an extended public mime of trying to escape from an invisible box?
xenzag, Jan 11 2021

       Only if the box is filled with cats
pocmloc, Jan 11 2021

       Send him up in a helicopter? Full of cats?
kdf, Jan 11 2021

       Stop ganging up on poor 8th!
xenzag, Jan 11 2021

       Hey ! Who are you, and what have you done with [xenzag] ? We'll tell SWMBO that the account's been hacked, you know !   

       The idea of being at a useful* height with a load of cats, above a hard surface, so that they can be thrown out sequentially, might persuade us to take the risk of rotary wing.   

       It's difficult to know which is better; the experience of throwing the cats out and watching them plummet, or the experience of watching them hit the ground, limbs flailing.   

       // Impeachable //   

       Are they the ones that come in a can, with syrup, or the sort that have to be peeled ?   

       Either way is fine ... is there a choice of cream, ice cream, or custard ? We would like vanilla ice cream with ours, please - the proper stuff, with real Madagascan vanilla pods.   

       // Class, repeat after me: "8th is never wrong." //   

       You're wasting your time, none of them pay attention, even some of the bright ones (and there aren't many of those).   

       <Stomps away to indulge in bitter, resentful muttering/>   



       *sufficient for effective autorotation.
8th of 7, Jan 11 2021

       //By constantly changing the context, he will always right about whatever it is he's talking about at the moment.// If that's impeachable you'd better prepare a lot of judges, we're going to be indicting the internet.
Voice, Jan 12 2021

       Thankyou, [Voice]; your education in electronics will continue when you have completed your term paper. We don't think it will present much of a challenge to you, as it's on your favourite subject - "The Bleedin' Obvious".
8th of 7, Jan 12 2021

       Seeing as how I don't grossly inhale through my eyes, I do see them as having a smaller risk of infection than my piehole.
RayfordSteele, Jan 12 2021

       It's the simple fact that the eyes are exposed mucous membranes; just as vulnerable to the tissues of the respiratory and digestive tracts.   

       For this pathogen - unlike some other viruses - it's a primary route. Compare that to Norovirus, which is highly infectious, but spreads almost exclusively by the oral route.   

       The risk isn't smaller at all. If you want to protect yourself, you need a mask that covers your entire face, and that seals; and on removal, you need to follow a proper, rigorous decontamination protocol.
8th of 7, Jan 12 2021

       //covers your entire face, and that seals// sp. those seals, or that seal. Either way it would be a big mask.
pocmloc, Jan 12 2021

       Alarmingly, Amazon don't sell respirators for seals, or indeed any pinnipeds. Even more surprisingly, Alibaba don't, either !   

       We spy a Market Opportunity; masks that seal, for seals.   

       They would of course require a seal of approval from some competent body. That would be the seal seal seal ...
8th of 7, Jan 12 2021

       Yes, I know that they are mucus membranes. My membrain is not lamebrained. But they do not experience a higher volume of airflow. That has to count for something.
RayfordSteele, Jan 12 2021

       Protecting your "other" mucous membranes is done by OTHER people also wearing (normal, mouth'n'nose) masks. That's the whole point of the "everybody wear a mask" rule. You mask isn't (just) to protect you, it's to protect others.
neutrinos_shadow, Jan 12 2021

       Sneezing through a loose weave forces the big, heavy droplets that would otherwise quickly fall to the ground through what's essentially an atomizing diffuser, aerosolizing the virus and causing it to linger in the air at the respiratory level. [+]
21 Quest, Jan 13 2021

       Do you have a source for that [21]?
Voice, Jan 13 2021

       It's at least as valid a theory as Bill Nye blowing at a candle flame and saying "See, flame no move! Proof mask works!"   

       Yeah, he did that lol
21 Quest, Jan 13 2021

       That 8% (or even 4%) is useful if, combined with other measures, reduces the reinfection rate (the 'R' value) below 1.0 Think of the power of compounding interest. See Link
AusCan531, Jan 13 2021

       I have some serious doubts about your atomizing diffuser hypothesis, [21Q]. It doesn't seem to hold water. Once there is a minimal amount of liquid film on the mask, for example, the dynamics would have to change significantly.   


       Here's a summary of their conclusions:   

       "...We computationally investigated the flow physics of respiratory droplets arising from coughing around and through a face mask. We considered a mask consisting of air-permeable filtering material made of porous fibrous layers. The fluid flow and cough dynamics significantly influence the droplet transmission and, in turn, the overall mask efficiency:   

       1. Without wearing a mask, droplets travel to about 70 cm.   

       2. Wearing a mask, the bulk of droplets will travel about half the distance.   

       3. However, in both cases, there are still isolated droplets transmitted beyond 70 cm.   

       4. Mask efficiency is dynamic (not constant). It is reduced during cough cycles. The fluid dynamics and the interactions between the droplets, the filter, and the face influence mask efficiency. We show that after ten cough cycles, efficiency can drop &#8764;8%. The above is a conservative prediction considering that we model a mild cough incident and ten cough cycles. We should expect more significant efficiency reduction for severe coughing events, as well as when wearing a mask for a longer period.   

       5. The dosage and time of exposure to a virus affecting a human are not known and will vary across subjects. We examined 10% and 32% of droplets, which are smaller than their corresponding initial size, and found that they reduce in number during cough cycles when wearing a mask.   

       6. The diameter of the transmitted droplets is larger across cough cycles when no mask is worn.   

       7. The accumulation of droplets in the surrounding environment increases as the cough continues and is more significant without a mask.   

       8. With a mask, droplet penetration approximately reaches a mean value. Without a mask, the rate of the droplet penetration increases with cough cycles and tends to decrease after several periods.   

       9. The mask to face fitting is important. Even in the case of a tight fitting scenario, if there exist some small openings, this can lead to additional leakage of droplets around the mask, which cannot be ignored. It contributes to an additional reduction in the mask efficiency with respect to efficiency reduction induced by the cyclic behavior of the coughing incident.   

       10. By wearing a mask, it will also provide greater protection to the wearer as it blocks the droplets expelled from another subject and further decelerates the incoming jet.   

       11. The complex droplet interactions and fluid physics lead to interesting phenomena such as hot spots downstream of the mask and flow recirculation associated with buoyancy.   

       According to the results of this study, we make the following recommendations:   

       1. Although masks will reduce droplet transmission, we should not ignore that several droplets will be transmitted away from the mask. The use of a mask will not provide complete prevention from airborne droplet transmission. The above is particularly important for both indoor and outdoor environments. As Dbouk and Drikakis3 showed, respiratory droplets can be transmitted to several meters away from the subject due to wind conditions. Therefore, social distancing remains essential when facing an evolving pandemic.   

       2. The above recommendation implies that we can protect healthcare workers only if we equip them with a complete PPE, e.g., a helmet with a built-in air filter, a face shield together with a disposable suit over the whole ensemble, and a double set of gloves.   

       3. The manufacturers and regulatory authorities should consider new criteria for assessing mask performance to account for the flow physics and cough dynamics. We provided a simple criterion that takes into account efficiency reduction during a cyclic coughing incident.   

       Further research is required to advance the understanding of the following:   

       1. Droplets breakup and coalescence phenomena that induce a liquid film barrier on the fibrous porous surface of the face mask, e.g., at the pore microstructure scale.   

       2. Cough dynamics across subjects that experience different medical conditions.   

       3. Saliva droplet composition effects on cough dynamics and droplet transmission.   

       4. The effects of a high-filter efficiency offered by more advanced mask designs relative to breathing comfort."
RayfordSteele, Jan 13 2021


back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle