FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Does it end???
Does it end???
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"I got covid. Tried so hard to keep clear of the wife, sleeping in separate rooms etc but inevitably she now has it too while I’m just getting over it. My question is, are we just going to keep passing it to each other and have it for evermore seeing as you can now get it more than once??" No, you will have developed an immunity for the strain that you both had. You won't just catch it back from her. Cal | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "I had it and I’ve had proper flu twice in my life which wiped me out both times.Covid just felt a bit meh. Totally agree that the next several years are going to be horrendous for a lot of people. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "I do find comments like muzzles insulting. I work in a care setting and they are an essential part of protection for us and our residents, to be honest I find it irresponsible for those that act like there has never been a pandemic... although glad for you that you have remained unaffected by it. I've lost friends and loved ones and covid was singularly the worst illness I've had. I agree vaccines are personal choice but to not follow the guidelines such as masks, hand washing and social distancing I find that quite a selfish view. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Very pleased for you that you've got through so easily. Maybe you could exhibit some degree of empathy with the hundreds of thousands of families that have lost relatives, friends, loved ones? God forbid that you should catch it yourself and be seriously fucked up... | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "It ended for the people who died. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "I had this attitude for the majority of the pandemic, even took part in the "Not our children march" in London protesting against forced mask wearing in schools. But roughly 2 months before all the restrictions were lifted, me and a friend both caught it at the same time on the same night out. I, someone who actually had and still has a compromised immune system because of meds I take, faired relatively fine, just rested up at home till I tested negative. But he, a bricky and rugby player, built like a brick shit house and a full blown health and fitness guru, ended up dying 3 weeks after being admitted into hospital with Covid. That humbled my outlook on Covid pretty rapidly. I whole heartedly agree we should get on with normal life now, but at the same time, we shouldn't just brush it off as another cold, because it definitely isn't. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "A hand clap for you. Well done. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Also add that the outdoor face nappy cult look like zombies, weird | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it. Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was? Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self. Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful."We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "I think somebody just SEVERELY reduced the pool of "people who would like to meet me" | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "You and me both! | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "No muzzles!!  ...rude!!! | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people "citation needed. Are we talking ever ever, or deaths in a two year span? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people "Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder. Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid | |||
| |||
"nowhere* " https://www.ons.gov.uk/search?q=influenza https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people "Again the big difference between Flu and Covid Are 1. Mortality rate is still 40% more than flu even with vaccines https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/news/covid-omicron-more-lethal-than-flu/ 2. Morbidity rates are very worrying with long Covid https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/prevalenceofongoingsymptomsfollowingcoronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/7april2022 Bottom line 1% of men infected, 1.5 % of women infected have LC lasting more than a year- individual tragic and horrific- nationally- this is going to cost us all a lot to treat/ manage long term. And we worry about HIV and other STD’s, these conditions are preventable or treatable( personally I advocate safe sex but agree it’s a personal choice). A mask is the best way to prevent LC . | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Ignorance and selfishness at its best. It’s astounding that over two years later people still hold these views. You carry on wallowing in your smugness. It sickens me. Viv " | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people "So true, I’ve been lucky enough to avoid Covid, but had flue 3 times in my life, felt on my death bed for two weeks with fever and didn’t fully recover each time for 4-6 weeks. No disease is to be sniffed at. We are all mortal and need to show more humility in the face of nature. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Ignorance and selfishness at its best. It’s astounding that over two years later people still hold these views. You carry on wallowing in your smugness. It sickens me. Viv " Quite. As people wanted to be left to personal choice when breaking mandatory mask rules, so perhaps we should leave people who are not breaking rules to choose how to manage their health. Except, you know, that the muzzle zombie cult aren't breaking the law, they're just mortally offending the strong, brave, and noble among us  | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Ignorance and selfishness at its best. It’s astounding that over two years later people still hold these views. You carry on wallowing in your smugness. It sickens me. Viv Quite. As people wanted to be left to personal choice when breaking mandatory mask rules, so perhaps we should leave people who are not breaking rules to choose how to manage their health. Except, you know, that the muzzle zombie cult aren't breaking the law, they're just mortally offending the strong, brave, and noble among us "Haha what a bunch of virtue signalling crap | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Ignorance and selfishness at its best. It’s astounding that over two years later people still hold these views. You carry on wallowing in your smugness. It sickens me. Viv Quite. As people wanted to be left to personal choice when breaking mandatory mask rules, so perhaps we should leave people who are not breaking rules to choose how to manage their health. Except, you know, that the muzzle zombie cult aren't breaking the law, they're just mortally offending the strong, brave, and noble among us
Haha what a bunch of virtue signalling crap"What, letting people not breaking the law get on with their personal choice? Gosh. I thought personal choice and obeying the law was a good thing. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "A good friend of mine had that attitude. He was a triathlete - no history of illness whatsoever and a very fit human. Are well, didn’t drink. He totally disregarded social distancing rules, much to the chagrin of his friends and family, caught covid, was in bed for a month and now can’t exercise, then passed it onto his mother, who died. Who do you reckon he now thinks is the fool? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Perhaps you'd like to say the above to my Grandad? You'll find him in an urn, reduced to powder. He'll be a captive audience. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
A good friend of mine had that attitude. He was a triathlete - no history of illness whatsoever and a very fit human. Are well, didn’t drink.
He totally disregarded social distancing rules, much to the chagrin of his friends and family, caught covid, was in bed for a month and now can’t exercise, then passed it onto his mother, who died.
Who do you reckon he now thinks is the fool?
"My mother and her husband did the same. They caught it, passed it to my Grandad, who they were living (squatting) with. My Grandad died. So did my mother's husband. And she still doesn't believe COVID exists and is still a COVID denying conspiracy nutjob. She wonders why I don't want to talk to her. | |||
| |||
" Haha what a bunch of virtue signalling crap" The green arrow tells me all I need to know. Viv | |||
" Quite. As people wanted to be left to personal choice when breaking mandatory mask rules, so perhaps we should leave people who are not breaking rules to choose how to manage their health. Except, you know, that the muzzle zombie cult aren't breaking the law, they're just mortally offending the strong, brave, and noble among us "I will stay off these threads, I will stay off these threads, I will…..Oopps! | |||
 | |||
"This forum never fails. Sleeping in a separate room from your wife and she still got it??? Lol What does that tell you? Get on with life ffs. "It tells you that the disease is quite contagious, and people should manage their own risk in ways that make sense to them, rather than being told to ignore it by people on the internet? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Very pleased for you that you've got through so easily. Maybe you could exhibit some degree of empathy with the hundreds of thousands of families that have lost relatives, friends, loved ones? God forbid that you should catch it yourself and be seriously fucked up..."That's hardly empathic is it? I do appreciate hundreds of thousands died WITH covid but we'll never know how many died because of covid. If covid was entered on a death certificate, there was no post mortem examination so the real cause of death will never be known. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid"medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. I do find comments like muzzles insulting. I work in a care setting and they are an essential part of protection for us and our residents, to be honest I find it irresponsible for those that act like there has never been a pandemic... although glad for you that you have remained unaffected by it.
I've lost friends and loved ones and covid was singularly the worst illness I've had. I agree vaccines are personal choice but to not follow the guidelines such as masks, hand washing and social distancing I find that quite a selfish view. "All scientific studies into the effectiveness of masks agree they are 90+%ineffective look it up  | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. I do find comments like muzzles insulting. I work in a care setting and they are an essential part of protection for us and our residents, to be honest I find it irresponsible for those that act like there has never been a pandemic... although glad for you that you have remained unaffected by it.
I've lost friends and loved ones and covid was singularly the worst illness I've had. I agree vaccines are personal choice but to not follow the guidelines such as masks, hand washing and social distancing I find that quite a selfish view.
All scientific studies into the effectiveness of masks agree they are 90+%ineffective look it up "Depends which studies, tbe real ones or the Facebook ones lol | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years "Again, facts according to facetube The actual facts are also available | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years "Peak was 1600 flu deaths. https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/influenzadeathsintheukbetween2012to2022 Deaths due to COVID with no underlying pre conditions. C16k up to q3 2021 https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsfromcovid19withnootherunderlyingcauses Of course, this is a apples with oranges as we aren't stripping our flu deaths where there are ore conditions. And pre conditions include Accidental falls, fractured femurs, obesity, diabetes... So stuff that doesn't normally kill and a lot of the population suffers from. I would be interested to see your sources as we seem to be quite a way apart in flu deaths.... | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available "Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available
Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine "link us up then, there's a good chap | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available
Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine link us up then, there's a good chap "https://youtu.be/U90eDxJV_9k | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available
Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine link us up then, there's a good chap
https://youtu.be/U90eDxJV_9k"Did that have the flu number in. I skippee thru it so may have missed it I refer to my earlier post tho. Pre conditions include being obese or diabetic. It's not just people at death's door. Boris probably would have been excluded from the 17k. And most flu deaths will likely have ore conditions. Yet people will count these as deaths from the flu. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Thanks all" Putting for others: Just had a family member stay with me with COVID to keep them away from other vulnerable relatives. Family member stayed in spare room, window open and heated bed cover. Food dropped at door. Toilet and shower visits were done after area of travel was vacated. A couple of times I needed to go in for moral support. We both wore N95 P3 masks, sat with her a number of times for around 15-30 minutes on bed within half a meter. LFT was unmistakably positive days 1 to 4. Day 5 the LFT faded, day 6 showed no virus. 2 weeks later, I have not caught it although was in close proximity. The only protection was both wearing masks, window open and washing hands. Other families I know have done exactly same regime as this and again, there has been no infection of any other family member. | |||
in fact I’d happily wear two at once just to keep some people away from my face. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Stopped reading at ‘MSM’ - that’s always a sign things are going to get weird. | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available
Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine link us up then, there's a good chap
https://youtu.be/U90eDxJV_9k"I think that Nigel Farage's "unbiased" opinions and interpretation of statistics are something that don't add any "facts" to any discussion. If you look at the actual ONS website and search for: "Deaths due to coronavirus (COVID-19) compared with deaths from influenza and pneumonia, England and Wales: deaths occurring between 1 January and 31 August 2020" There is the actual report. Scroll down "Figure 3: The number of deaths due to COVID-19 was higher than the number of deaths due to influenza and pneumonia in every year since 2000" Note that this is comparing influenza AND pneumonia to Covid. Also; "Analysis of COVID-19 deaths in this bulletin, includes only those deaths with an underlying cause of death of COVID-19, referred to as "due to COVID-19". This is different from deaths "involving COVID-19" used in other publications, which includes deaths that had COVID-19 mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, whether as underlying cause or not." Read and understand the source. Those are the actual facts. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. "If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution. Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up? If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth" The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so. Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. "Good idea. We should do that with all pandemics. Condoms are icky and HIV looks like flu in many people for years. Plus, it's killed less people than Covid, which is just a cold. Stupid contact tracers, trying to get an income out of fear. Maybe if AIDS patients had led better lives they would just bounce back to health like normal people, eh? | |||
Winston | |||
"I'm taking my glasses off, I've seen enough.......
Winston"
It's boggled my mind too | |||
"I'm taking my glasses off, I've seen enough.......
Winston
It's boggled my mind too "I hope you both detected my sarcasm font  | |||
"I'm taking my glasses off, I've seen enough.......
Winston
It's boggled my mind too "Every. Single. Day. 
Winston | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available
Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine link us up then, there's a good chap
https://youtu.be/U90eDxJV_9k"The good old source of facts that is YouTube lol you're having a laugh | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. "I've another idea, stop postmortems and let people die and get buried therefore cancer will no longer exist, nobody will die of heart attacks and we'll all live in blissful ignorance | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
I've another idea, stop postmortems and let people die and get buried therefore cancer will no longer exist, nobody will die of heart attacks and we'll all live in blissful ignorance "Close hospitals. Stop all this negativity. | |||
"Average flu deaths when they have been properly collected which isn't that long is about 14 to 15 thousand. It's slightly skewed by couple of flu outbreaks where vaccination were not as effective. Flu typically kills around 6 to 8 thousand people a year. In a good year it is 1500 a bad year 26000. How many die of flu with no co morbitities virtually zero." looks like it's flu and pneumonia that get us to 26k. Most of which looks to be pneumonia. (Not that you are saying anything to the contrary. Just the last person to quote this number) | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
I find comments like yours shocking. You are extremely lucky to not have been affected by Covid, especially with your lack of consideration trying to prevent it.
Personally my ex husband, a fit healthy paramedic caught it in the first wave . He was hospitalised and given experimental drugs but we were warned things looked bleak. We could not visit or even speak on the phone while he was able to. I sat down with my 25 year old son, as he was his dad's next on kin, and talk through how I would support him with the arrangements if he didn't make it. Can you imagine how devastating that conversation was?
Thankfully he did pull through, but has permanently scarred lungs and will never return to his former healthy self.
Even if you think Covid isn't anything to be concerned about, have some compassion for families bereaved or who lived through trauma and are suffering serious long term health issues due to Covid. Your comments are hurtful.
We talk about the flue like it’s a joke but it’s killed more people than covid . Fact is people are fed up of having covid rammed down there throat for the last 2 and half years , yes it’s tragic there’s been loss of life but we need to get on with it now it’s caused enough missery for a lot of people
Does that include the misery for the families of the people who died with it I wonder.
Yearly deaths with Flu over two years is no were near the amount of people who have died with Covid
medical statistics from the ONS Flu average kills 20.000 per year Covid as a direct cause has killed 17.500over 2 years
Again, facts according to facetube
The actual facts are also available
Wrong again F. O. I release from the ons it was on the news just not the bbc government propaganda machine link us up then, there's a good chap
https://youtu.be/U90eDxJV_9k"Long Covid is the sting in the tail that influenza doesn’t have- it’s the monster on the other side of the hill and it’s just starting to bear its teeth https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/long-covid-health-illness-b2065921.html 400k affected, costing 8 billion a year not to mind the physical and physiological trauma. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Also add that the outdoor face nappy cult look like zombies, weird "You'll be needing more than a face nappy when Mad Vlad starts lobbing his missiles at us, and you will end up zombiefied | |||
"If people are unable to tell the difference between a mask and a muzzle, pet play night is going to be very strange..... Winston " Kinky  | |||
| |||
"Live with it as you fo with the flu" What, managing my risk, getting vaccinated, and doing better as I know more? Yup. On it | |||
"Live with it as you fo with the flu" If you ever had flu (proper influenza virus, not just a bit of man-flu) you would know that the best way to live with it is to do everything you possibly can to avoid catching it again. I had proper flu January 2000, one week of being laid up in bed hurting like hell, two more weeks of being unable to stand for more than a few minutes, three months as weak as a kitten. Reduced fitness for well over a year. Flu isn't going away though, so I've learned to live with it. By getting regular vaccinations. By keeping the fuck away from people that show signs of respiratory diseases. By being aware of the problem and taking sensible, easy, mitigating precautions. It's called living with flu. Rather than dying with flu. | |||
"Live with it as you fo with the flu If you ever had flu (proper influenza virus, not just a bit of man-flu) you would know that the best way to live with it is to do everything you possibly can to avoid catching it again. I had proper flu January 2000, one week of being laid up in bed hurting like hell, two more weeks of being unable to stand for more than a few minutes, three months as weak as a kitten. Reduced fitness for well over a year. Flu isn't going away though, so I've learned to live with it. By getting regular vaccinations. By keeping the fuck away from people that show signs of respiratory diseases. By being aware of the problem and taking sensible, easy, mitigating precautions. It's called living with flu. Rather than dying with flu." Now we know more about masks, I'll be wearing masks to avoid catching flu. And particularly spreading flu. I don't want to hurt other people, even if I might be ok. I live with disease by reducing real physical harm to others  | |||
| |||
" I think it is highly likely that in spite of the vaccines you might have had, you might still be able to amass a little natural immunity to Covid. BNatural Immunity will serve you 100 times better than failed vaccines and boosters. " No thanks. Not interested. personal choice | |||
"I have been working full-time in Education since May 1990. I was forced off work by the Lockdown during the last week of March 2020. I was back in school by early May 2020. I've been there ever since (excluding school holidays of course). Schools have been OPEN. I haven't had any Pfizer or Moderna (or any) vaccine for Covid in all that time. I am not interested in their "boosters". I wore a mask for a year under the firsh) mandate. Then I got an exemption from my doctor in around March 2021 and breathed fresh clean air ever since (not snottery, muscus-laden wet cloth filtered air). I never take a flu vaccine over those years either. I've had Flu twice in 30 years and numerous colds and respiratory infections. Nothing serious. I have an exemplary absence record at work. Years go by without a single sickness day. I got a sniffly cold-type thing (with a slight sore throat) in November 2021 and stayed off work for a couple of days. Some Lem-Sips and plenty of lying around reading, watching DVDs & wanking and I was soon fine and good as new. I am at work with over 1,000 people every day. Lots of staff and pupils have been off. No-one has had any serious illness. I eat my 5-a-day (sometimes 10 a day), drink lots of fluids (I drink very littlealcohol at all), get exercise and plenty of sleep. I take a wee multivitamin each day to keep me topped up. Been doing all that for a decade. It keeps you well. I think people have become fixated with a minor respiratory virus which has minimal impact on healthy humans and almost no impact at all on healthy children and young people. The MSM and an inept Government decided to become completely in awe of Mathematical Modellers, Contagion Planners and failed academics, burned through Public Sector Future Borrowing as quick as they could pass it on to their City Pals and ex-pub landlords. I think it is highly likely that in spite of the vaccines you might have had, you might still be able to amass a little natural immunity to Covid. BNatural Immunity will serve you 100 times better than failed vaccines and boosters. But be healthy... sleep well, eat well, drink less, fresh air and exercise. " Your experience relative to a population of 68 million and limited knowledge of the subject probably means that what you think, just like me, is not very well informed. If you genuinely think that you know better than people with deep knowledge and years of experience of the subject, then you make the decisions that are good for you. I'll defer to people who really do know more. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I."I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken "even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows; ‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’ | |||
| |||
| |||
" ‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’" Nothing in life is perfect. So basically they limit what spreads out of your mouth | |||
| |||
" ‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’ Nothing in life is perfect. So basically they limit what spreads out of your mouth " And what gets in. There's a risk in all parts of life, but my FFP3 helps mitigate my risk | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’"The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself. Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed? Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Just because you did nothing and didn’t catch it doesn’t make that the correct course of action for everyone Everyone is different and nobody can turn the clock back and try living in a alternate way | |||
| |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it."masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new. "As you say, our choice. Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new. "Do you mean the single use blue masks? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
Do you mean the single use blue masks? "
Winston | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new. "single use ones don't have this issue. We change ours every 4 hours at work or after every room with positive resident in. Or of we need to. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new. "So, what studies have been conducted that evidence any of this? Somebody must have conducted them, and they must have been reviewed and published. Are medical staff not aware of this or not able to understand the data? Why would you wear a disposable mask for several days? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
Do you mean the single use blue masks? "Of course they mean the single use masks, that are supposed to be like, you know (but they obviously don't) single use then throw away. In other news, condoms get a bit minging after the first three or four usages... | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
Do you mean the single use blue masks?
Of course they mean the single use masks, that are supposed to be like, you know (but they obviously don't) single use then throw away.
In other news, condoms get a bit minging after the first three or four usages... "Yeah but if you rinse them and hang on the line, condoms last for ages. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business."not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe."Ever heard of surgeons? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe."I will. Thank you for respecting the fact I've done my own research and am making my own decisions about my health. I too respect that you have differing views. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? "yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system. "You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly. Courses of antibiotics should be completed too. What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others? Stricter regulation? You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread. Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you. Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things?"not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come. "do you have links to studies. To quantify that degree? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come. "Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come. "So your telling me the dust masks I have been wearing for years whilst prepping cars for painting and sanding woodwork have been quickly killing me because of the polypropylene fibers they are made of have been shedding into my lungs rather than doing their job of stopping me breathing in the nasty dust I was creating I have been lied to by so many safety boards it's disgusting | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
So your telling me the dust masks I have been wearing for years whilst prepping cars for painting and sanding woodwork have been quickly killing me because of the polypropylene fibers they are made of have been shedding into my lungs rather than doing their job of stopping me breathing in the nasty dust I was creating I have been lied to by so many safety boards it's disgusting "Thank God there's been a pandemic to highlight the ways in which Big PPE is killing us all  | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
So your telling me the dust masks I have been wearing for years whilst prepping cars for painting and sanding woodwork have been quickly killing me because of the polypropylene fibers they are made of have been shedding into my lungs rather than doing their job of stopping me breathing in the nasty dust I was creating I have been lied to by so many safety boards it's disgusting
Thank God there's been a pandemic to highlight the ways in which Big PPE is killing us all "Exactly who'd of thought it would take a "scamdemic"  to finally highlight these atrocities | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
So your telling me the dust masks I have been wearing for years whilst prepping cars for painting and sanding woodwork have been quickly killing me because of the polypropylene fibers they are made of have been shedding into my lungs rather than doing their job of stopping me breathing in the nasty dust I was creating I have been lied to by so many safety boards it's disgusting
Thank God there's been a pandemic to highlight the ways in which Big PPE is killing us all
Exactly who'd of thought it would take a "scamdemic" to finally highlight these atrocities "It's almost as if PPE, testing, statistics were working just fine until Covid made things inconvenient for people. Then they had to make stuff u... I mean uncover the truth to get their lives back. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
So your telling me the dust masks I have been wearing for years whilst prepping cars for painting and sanding woodwork have been quickly killing me because of the polypropylene fibers they are made of have been shedding into my lungs rather than doing their job of stopping me breathing in the nasty dust I was creating I have been lied to by so many safety boards it's disgusting
Thank God there's been a pandemic to highlight the ways in which Big PPE is killing us all
Exactly who'd of thought it would take a "scamdemic" to finally highlight these atrocities
It's almost as if PPE, testing, statistics were working just fine until Covid made things inconvenient for people. Then they had to make stuff u... I mean uncover the truth to get their lives back."imma blame the government and science types for creating it all just to sell more poisonous ppe and "experimental" vaccines to the sheeple that arent woke enough to have seen the light of the all knowing professor YouTube with his qualifications from that well known medical institute Kelloggs | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come. "This reply is so funny.... Someone says "you keep repeating there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs, without any substantiation whatsoever" Your response is to say "there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs" Keep saying the same thing over and over won't make it any more true. Winston | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?"just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
This reply is so funny....
Someone says "you keep repeating there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs, without any substantiation whatsoever"
Your response is to say "there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs"
Keep saying the same thing over and over won't make it any more true.
Winston"whos Winston ? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
This reply is so funny....
Someone says "you keep repeating there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs, without any substantiation whatsoever"
Your response is to say "there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs"
Keep saying the same thing over and over won't make it any more true.
Winston
whos Winston ?"Apologies, this response is more funny. Winston | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self "I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes) But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk. Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days. My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. "it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks "What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters? Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks "it's not the most healthy. Agreed. I'm now trying to discuss just how unhealthy. And under what conditions. You are running close to arguning water is and for you because if you drink too much you could die. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay?"is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. "Thanks for the permission. FFP3 forever  | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
Thanks for the permission.
FFP3 forever "your most welcome; anytime | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. "I don't know for sure. I find no evidence that it is. Tbh, I don't wear masks much now .. however when I do, it will be a new mask each time, the way they are meant to be used. I'm still not sure why you think they are not safe to be used. Although given masks are used a lot less now, this horse has bolted. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. I don't know for sure. I find no evidence that it is. Tbh, I don't wear masks much now .. however when I do, it will be a new mask each time, the way they are meant to be used.
I'm still not sure why you think they are not safe to be used.
Although given masks are used a lot less now, this horse has bolted. "I feel we've shifted from "stop Covid regulations" to "try to convince everyone to stop taking individual precautions" See all the stuff here telling people to stop testing, etc. Anecdotally, the outright *hostility* I now get for wearing a mask is increasing. As there is no law telling me otherwise, my face, my choice. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. I don't know for sure. I find no evidence that it is. Tbh, I don't wear masks much now .. however when I do, it will be a new mask each time, the way they are meant to be used.
I'm still not sure why you think they are not safe to be used.
Although given masks are used a lot less now, this horse has bolted.
I feel we've shifted from "stop Covid regulations" to "try to convince everyone to stop taking individual precautions"
See all the stuff here telling people to stop testing, etc. Anecdotally, the outright *hostility* I now get for wearing a mask is increasing.
As there is no law telling me otherwise, my face, my choice."your lungs your choice; I couldn’t agree more | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. I don't know for sure. I find no evidence that it is. Tbh, I don't wear masks much now .. however when I do, it will be a new mask each time, the way they are meant to be used.
I'm still not sure why you think they are not safe to be used.
Although given masks are used a lot less now, this horse has bolted.
I feel we've shifted from "stop Covid regulations" to "try to convince everyone to stop taking individual precautions"
See all the stuff here telling people to stop testing, etc. Anecdotally, the outright *hostility* I now get for wearing a mask is increasing.
As there is no law telling me otherwise, my face, my choice.your lungs your choice; I couldn’t agree more "Yes, as established. I don't see why there's any need to labour the point. I've done my own research and have decided for myself. Your beliefs about masks are given the weight they deserve in my analysis. Thank you for understanding. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask. "From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data. There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion? Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres? Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene? Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene? Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you? | |||
| |||
| |||
"Having both having it twice in the past 6 months, we can guarantee that it's no fun. That said we know a number of friends who are non vaccinated and have not had it. Jab 4 .....maybe not." There's a lot of luck involved. You are succeptible or not. You don't know until you catch it. Even the latest version can be deadly without vaccination. What you are doing is minimising your chances of severe illness if you are succeptible. If you are not succeptible then it makes no difference to you but reduces the chances of spread to those who are. We're in a better place now due to you and millions of others getting vaccinated. Hopefully a good enough place for further vaccinations to not be so critical. The consequences are not as big as they were. For now at least. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?"just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you "Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan. Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?"has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?"Yawn. Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing. I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up. You do you | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
This reply is so funny....
Someone says "you keep repeating there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs, without any substantiation whatsoever"
Your response is to say "there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs"
Keep saying the same thing over and over won't make it any more true.
Winston
whos Winston ?
Apologies, this response is more funny.
Winston"Hilarious, just about sums him up doesn’t it? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you "the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense. "Funny how I've worn a face mask in work for up to 10+ hours a day post lockdown return, still 8 hours a day now for five days a week along with all of my colleagues and our lungs are perfectly fine | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
Funny how I've worn a face mask in work for up to 10+ hours a day post lockdown return, still 8 hours a day now for five days a week along with all of my colleagues and our lungs are perfectly fine "keep working at it; give it a few more years | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense. "What "facts"? That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head. Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense. "Lol, what a silly thing to say about scientists. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
This reply is so funny....
Someone says "you keep repeating there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs, without any substantiation whatsoever"
Your response is to say "there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs"
Keep saying the same thing over and over won't make it any more true.
Winston
whos Winston ?
Apologies, this response is more funny.
Winston
Hilarious, just about sums him up doesn’t it?"I'm still laughing now.
Winston | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Superspreaders. | |||
"How have all those people who wear disposable masks all day at work survived the last however many years they've been wearing them. They must have little left of their lung capacity by now." Two years for me, must have lost at least half a lung by now | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
What "facts"?
That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head.
Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times?"but you acknowledge the fact that the masks are made of polypropylene? Which can be inhaled into the lung tissues | |||
"How have all those people who wear disposable masks all day at work survived the last however many years they've been wearing them. They must have little left of their lung capacity by now. Two years for me, must have lost at least half a lung by now "I'm sorry for your imaginary loss | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
What "facts"?
That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head.
Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times?but you acknowledge the fact that the masks are made of polypropylene? Which can be inhaled into the lung tissues "I've accepted that earlier. Question is, is it harmful. if it is, what is the risk? Is it one off or cumulative. as I said before, that needs some science. Common sense doesn't help here as different things act in different ways. | |||
" I've accepted that earlier. Question is, is it harmful. if it is, what is the risk? Is it one off or cumulative. as I said before, that needs some science. Common sense doesn't help here as different things act in different ways. " It also depends on the way the masks are treated. Even if I assume that the previous poster is entirely correct, he's stated repeatedly that his model is based on longer term reuse of surgical masks that have been mistreated, such as stuffing in jeans pockets. As I've never reused a surgical mask once during the pandemic (switched from cloth to higher grade, only worn surgical in medical settings when told to)... That means nothing he says applies to me  | |||
| |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
What "facts"?
That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head.
Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times?but you acknowledge the fact that the masks are made of polypropylene? Which can be inhaled into the lung tissues "I have not denied at any point that some masks are, indeed, made of polypropylene. Many masks are not made of polypropylene. Can you acknowledge that? Polypropylene may, or may not, be inhaled into the lungs from masks at a level that causes damage to them. The level of inhalation may make no difference whatsoever. It may be less than that filtered by the mask from the air and provide a net benefit. The risk of an adverse effect may from inhalation of some unspecified quantity of polypropylene may, or may not be statistically significant. The point is that you have absolutely no idea how much polypropylene may be inhaled or if it does anything because you haven't bothered to find out what actual studies have been carried out. Start there and then come back and tell us that face masks are the next asbestosis. Medical staff and the Japanese and Taiwanese populations will be interested in your findings too. The wearing of a face mask does help to reduce the risk of infection from Covid-19 and other airborne viruses. There are studies and articles about this that many people have read. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
What "facts"?
That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head.
Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times?but you acknowledge the fact that the masks are made of polypropylene? Which can be inhaled into the lung tissues I've accepted that earlier.
Question is, is it harmful. if it is, what is the risk? Is it one off or cumulative.
as I said before, that needs some science. Common sense doesn't help here as different things act in different ways. "how harmful will depend on how much gets inhaled and deposited into the lung tissue. The higher the level of micro plastic the more risk of harm. Respiratory symptoms and disease following exposure to microplastics have been reported in some industry settings so we know they can cause harm when that occurs. The size of the micro-plastic fibre particles (from the face masks) deposited in the lung tissue will also determine the health impacts - generally size will range from 1mm to 5mm, the larger particles accumulated in the lung tissues are harder to break down and may remain in the lung tissue for a long duration. Particles larger than 5mm width are taught to be too large to enter alveolar region of the lung as the diameter of the alveolar duct won’t allow larger than 5mm particles which is good news. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry"I think the words "rush in" needn't have been typed. Winston | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry"I am so sorry | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
What "facts"?
That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head.
Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times?but you acknowledge the fact that the masks are made of polypropylene? Which can be inhaled into the lung tissues I've accepted that earlier.
Question is, is it harmful. if it is, what is the risk? Is it one off or cumulative.
as I said before, that needs some science. Common sense doesn't help here as different things act in different ways. how harmful will depend on how much gets inhaled and deposited into the lung tissue. The higher the level of micro plastic the more risk of harm.
Respiratory symptoms and disease following exposure to microplastics have been reported in some industry settings so we know they can cause harm when that occurs. The size of the micro-plastic fibre particles (from the face masks) deposited in the lung tissue will also determine the health impacts - generally size will range from 1mm to 5mm, the larger particles accumulated in the lung tissues are harder to break down and may remain in the lung tissue for a long duration. Particles larger than 5mm width are taught to be too large to enter alveolar region of the lung as the diameter of the alveolar duct won’t allow larger than 5mm particles which is good news. "Well done! How harmful, if at all, will depend on what quantity and what particle size,is inhaled. As you have no idea of either figure with respect to surgical masks or if there is any significant inhalation at all you have no idea what problem there is or if there is any issue at all. Well done for belatedly looking for some vaguely related information that sounds scary but still does not mean that your continual repetition of your "common sense" is in any way meaningful because the situation is not "common" to your experience. Except, that is, for medical staff and the populations of Japanese and Taiwanese cities over many decades... | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry"So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy. "Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means??? The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine"I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either) | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)"Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then?? | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine"Apologies, I do understand OP but must admit the poster who keeps talking about common sense but doesn’t have any had rather overtaken this thread so I’d forgotten he wasn’t the OP! | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)
Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then??"My understanding is that OP can mean the author of the thread, or the specific poster being quoted within the thread. Particularly obvious which is which if quote+reply is used. I could be wrong though. It happens. Rarely, but it does happen.
Winston | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)
Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then??
My understanding is that OP can mean the author of the thread, or the specific poster being quoted within the thread. Particularly obvious which is which if quote+reply is used.
I could be wrong though. It happens. Rarely, but it does happen.
Winston"The first line that was commented on was mine ie. "does it end" which then was insinuated the whole thing was my opinion which it was not, maybe if the lady had actually took the trouble to read the very first post, her comment may have been different, but as it reads, it looks as if I was the "no common sense or empathy" poster when it was not | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)
Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then??
My understanding is that OP can mean the author of the thread, or the specific poster being quoted within the thread. Particularly obvious which is which if quote+reply is used.
I could be wrong though. It happens. Rarely, but it does happen.
Winston
The first line that was commented on was mine ie. "does it end" which then
was insinuated the whole thing was my opinion which it was not, maybe if the lady had actually took the trouble to read the very first post, her comment may have been different, but as it reads, it looks as if I was the "no common sense or empathy" poster when it was not"I’ve read the whole thread, I understand OP. However I made the mistake for which I’ve already apologised. I’m happy to admit when I’m wrong unlike the person I was meant to be referring to. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)
Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then??
My understanding is that OP can mean the author of the thread, or the specific poster being quoted within the thread. Particularly obvious which is which if quote+reply is used.
I could be wrong though. It happens. Rarely, but it does happen.
Winston
The first line that was commented on was mine ie. "does it end" which then
was insinuated the whole thing was my opinion which it was not, maybe if the lady had actually took the trouble to read the very first post, her comment may have been different, but as it reads, it looks as if I was the "no common sense or empathy" poster when it was not
I’ve read the whole thread, I understand OP. However I made the mistake for which I’ve already apologised. I’m happy to admit when I’m wrong unlike the person I was meant to be referring to. "Thank you, apology gratefully accepted. And for the record, I entirely agree with your post | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)
Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then??
My understanding is that OP can mean the author of the thread, or the specific poster being quoted within the thread. Particularly obvious which is which if quote+reply is used.
I could be wrong though. It happens. Rarely, but it does happen.
Winston
The first line that was commented on was mine ie. "does it end" which then
was insinuated the whole thing was my opinion which it was not, maybe if the lady had actually took the trouble to read the very first post, her comment may have been different, but as it reads, it looks as if I was the "no common sense or empathy" poster when it was not
I’ve read the whole thread, I understand OP. However I made the mistake for which I’ve already apologised. I’m happy to admit when I’m wrong unlike the person I was meant to be referring to.
Thank you, apology gratefully accepted.
And for the record, I entirely agree with your post"Thank you | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Tell that to my children who thanks to Covid, no longer have their mum around, they almost lost me too only 3 weeks after their mum died, I had covid pneumonia and was in hospital. I was lucky I survived. People like you make me so angry
So sorry to hear this and glad you are ok. OPs ‘common sense’ clearly doesn’t stretch to empathy.
Sorry... I'm the OP and I see nowhere in my OP where I ask no more than can it be passed back and forth, No mention of anything else so why you are accusing me of having no common sense or empathy eludes me .... have you actually read the Original Post or do you not understand what OP actually means???
The only part of this quoted from my OP is "does it end" all other words in the post are not mine
I think they mean "original person in the quote tree" (I wouldn't use OP in that way either)
Thank you, so they clearly don't understand the correct usage of OP then??
My understanding is that OP can mean the author of the thread, or the specific poster being quoted within the thread. Particularly obvious which is which if quote+reply is used.
I could be wrong though. It happens. Rarely, but it does happen.
Winston
The first line that was commented on was mine ie. "does it end" which then
was insinuated the whole thing was my opinion which it was not, maybe if the lady had actually took the trouble to read the very first post, her comment may have been different, but as it reads, it looks as if I was the "no common sense or empathy" poster when it was not"*hands the OP a ladder.... Winston | |||
| |||
"I think, re the original poster of the thread - there is some immunity to the version of Covid you've got, so any short term infectiousness issues won't be on repeat. However, it's my understanding that disease induced immunity to Omicron doesn't seem to be particularly durable (at least outside severe disease - no one wants that), and as has been noted elsewhere, different subvariants are on the rise. I hope you're both better and stay that way" Thank you, it was probably a stupid question on reflection, I had it in my head that as I had got it, then despite all possible precautions other than leaving home, The wife tested positive 10 days later as mine was just about clear, I'm think she may give it back to me and it go on forever lol | |||
"I think, re the original poster of the thread - there is some immunity to the version of Covid you've got, so any short term infectiousness issues won't be on repeat. However, it's my understanding that disease induced immunity to Omicron doesn't seem to be particularly durable (at least outside severe disease - no one wants that), and as has been noted elsewhere, different subvariants are on the rise. I hope you're both better and stay that way Thank you, it was probably a stupid question on reflection, I had it in my head that as I had got it, then despite all possible precautions other than leaving home, The wife tested positive 10 days later as mine was just about clear, I'm think she may give it back to me and it go on forever lol " Yeah, immunity is a bit more durable than that. But I totally get why your brain would go there. | |||
"I think, re the original poster of the thread - there is some immunity to the version of Covid you've got, so any short term infectiousness issues won't be on repeat. However, it's my understanding that disease induced immunity to Omicron doesn't seem to be particularly durable (at least outside severe disease - no one wants that), and as has been noted elsewhere, different subvariants are on the rise. I hope you're both better and stay that way Thank you, it was probably a stupid question on reflection, I had it in my head that as I had got it, then despite all possible precautions other than leaving home, The wife tested positive 10 days later as mine was just about clear, I'm think she may give it back to me and it go on forever lol " No such thing as a stupid question if you don't know the answer.
Winston | |||
"I think, re the original poster of the thread - there is some immunity to the version of Covid you've got, so any short term infectiousness issues won't be on repeat. However, it's my understanding that disease induced immunity to Omicron doesn't seem to be particularly durable (at least outside severe disease - no one wants that), and as has been noted elsewhere, different subvariants are on the rise. I hope you're both better and stay that way Thank you, it was probably a stupid question on reflection, I had it in my head that as I had got it, then despite all possible precautions other than leaving home, The wife tested positive 10 days later as mine was just about clear, I'm think she may give it back to me and it go on forever lol No such thing as a stupid question if you don't know the answer.
Winston"Absolutely | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. well said; stop the dodgy tests and this pandemic would evaporate within a week; as for the muzzles; a complete waste of time and cause more harm by breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs.
If you don't test then no problem exists. Pretending that nothing is happening is certainly one solution.
Have medical staff over decades been suffering from "harm" breathing in polypropylene fibres? That's scandalous! Why has nothing been done? Was there a cover-up?
If we are going to use sayings to analyse complicated statistical and medical data, we could also go with; "Don't look a gifthorse in the mouth"
The next few years studying the effects of long Covid certainly will be interesting. Sadly so.
Wearing masks in enclosed does help to reduce transmission as part of a system including hand washing and distancing and vaccination. On their own they each provide some benefit, but together they have a larger effect because they overlap to cover gaps. "Swiss cheese" risk reduction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f
Fools did not spend decades developing expertise in their professions to develop medical knowledge and technology. Some of thems are much better at this than either you or I. I take it all back; I didn’t realise the foundation of all knowledge the BBC had spoken even though you BBC article somewhat agrees with me - quote as follows;
‘Masks and face coverings can block virus droplets from coughs, sneezes and speaking. But even the highest-grade masks still let some virus through.’
The link is a simple explanation of the point as it is not possible to link to research papers on the site. You can easily find the references yourself.
Which source do you prefer to the BBC that you find trustworthy? Is everything from the BBC wrong? Of not, how do you distinguish what should and should not be believed?
Nobody said that the masks were completely secure. That is the point of using multiple risk reduction measures together. Hence the link to explain it.masks worn for long duration wear and tear; the polypropylene fibre’s shed and can be inhaled and may harm your Your choice but I’m only stating facts; facts which the BBC would never in a lifetime report to the public. Daily intake of polypropylene microplastics can cause harm; abrasion causes the release of tiny microplastics polypropylene fibres. Wearing a new mask everyday is better; but wearing the same mask for a few days then the fibres start to shed and are inhaled into the lungs. Iv seen so many people put the mask in and out of their jeans back pocket which advances the wear and tear and the polypropylene fibres start the shed and be inhaled. Look at your typical mask after it’s been worn for a few days and you can see the fibres starting to shed from when the mask was first new.
As you say, our choice.
Why are you concerned about the choices others make? Their mask, their business.not concerned at all; just most people don’t really think of the harmful aspects that the masks have by inhaling microplastic polypropylene fibres into your lungs. Leaving that aside; The masks allow reinhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions which were caught in facemasks (as droplet) which is another aspect which causes harm. But by all means; put a mask on if you think they keep you safe.
Ever heard of surgeons? yes; they immediately discard the mask after every use; not like your ordinary Joe soap in the bus who uses the same mask for about a week ! The more use of same mask over and over where abrasion causes the polypropylene fibres to shed and inhale into your lungs. Simple as that ; but like I said; your choice at end of the day but they can cause serious harm with microplastic polypropylene fibres being inhaled into the lungs and harming your respiratory system.
You're quite correct. Disposable masks should be disposed of regularly.
Courses of antibiotics should be completed too.
What should be done to compel people to read instructions and follow them for their own well being and that of others?
Stricter regulation?
You still haven't found any information to indicate how significant a health problem wearing masks for "too long" might cause and how that compared to the harm of catching Covid before vaccinations were widespread.
Repeatedly saying that "polypropylene gets in your lungs" sounds scary but you don't actually have any idea to what extent this happens, the relative risk of catching Corona virus or if it is a risk at all, yet you keep repeating the same thing because it sounds credible to you.
Why so keen to persuade people to not wear disposable masks of all things? not keen at all, just keep wearing the masks if you want to ; but there is a degree of risk breathing in polypropylene fibres into your lungs. The government has practically ignored that from the onset. I think we will find out how harmful it is or not in years to come.
Do you have any information that quantifies this risk or is it something that you have heard that sounds sensible to you as someone with no deep knowledge of medicine?just some basic common sense and logic; unfortunately we are not all medical experts like your hood self I can get to common sense saying we may be breathing extra stuff in by having masks (question, is there other stuff we are breathing less in too? Common sense woukd say yes)
But the real question is whether this is harmful or not. And if so, what level of harm and at what risk.
Common sense doesn't help here. We breathe in shit all the time. Our lungs are pretty good at filtering out shit. Othewise smokers would be dead in days.
My first hit in finding a paper suggested your belief we inhale stuff was correct. It also suggested that it was reversible and no long term issues. it’s true we do breath stuff in all the time; including microplastic fibres from other sources such as carpets; rugs etc - but wearing shitty single use masks for a week certainly increases the intake and polypropylene isn’t the most healthy of substances to be inhaling and being constantly exposed almost daily if wearing masks
What information do you have to suggest that this is a significant problem other than "common sense" which by its nature may work for simple everyday matters?
Nobody should be listening to the opinions of unknowledgeable people. So,what do the knowledgeable peopysay? is breathing polypropylene fibres into your lungs harmful or not ? If you believe it’s not; then no worries continue wearing your mask.
From that it is pretty clear that this is your belief worked out from your "common sense", based on no data.
There are a small number of papers, all of which indicate mask wearing is significantly more beneficial than not. Have you any contrary information other than your opinion?
Is it harmful to breathe in the air in most city centres?
Is that more or less harmful than wearing a mask and breathing in and unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Does a mask prevent more particulates from other sources being breathed in than an unspecified quantity of polypropylene?
Have the populations of Japan and Taiwan who have worn masks in public places for decades suffered a pandemic of lung conditions? What does your "common sense" tell you?just keep wearing your plastic mask if that makes you feel safer and make sure you cover both your mouth and nose. My common sense tells me that breathing in polypropylene microplastic fibres from the face masks Is not healthy for you
Just your belief then. No actual information to back a medical claim outside "common" experience and completely ignoring any information that conflicts with your view from years of use by medical staff and the populations of Japan and Taiwan.
Of course, you "know" that you're right so what else is needed?has the lack of fresh air effected your common sense ? microplastic fibres from prolonged wearing of face masks can be inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system which isn’t healthy for you. The chemicals and toxins in polypropylene can cause serious harm. Is it not common sense to at least make people aware so they can make an informed decision to wear them or not ? Or change the mask at least every day? Or do I need a scientist to tell me how to look after myself for everything?
Yawn.
Repeating the same thing relentlessly without being able to process any new information is quite wearing.
I'll leave you to being "right" without any data to back it up.
You do you the facts are clear ; polypropylene micro plastic fibres from face mask which are inhaled into your lungs and respiratory system are not healthy for you. Not to mention all the other dirty particles that contaminates the mask which are also inhaled. But I know your a man of science who finds it’s difficult to think for himself and apply common sense.
What "facts"?
That is all that anyone has asked you to do. Show us the facts rather than what is in your head.
Over to you, or will you just reboot and repeat the same thing again as you have the last dozen times?but you acknowledge the fact that the masks are made of polypropylene? Which can be inhaled into the lung tissues I've accepted that earlier.
Question is, is it harmful. if it is, what is the risk? Is it one off or cumulative.
as I said before, that needs some science. Common sense doesn't help here as different things act in different ways. how harmful will depend on how much gets inhaled and deposited into the lung tissue. The higher the level of micro plastic the more risk of harm.
Respiratory symptoms and disease following exposure to microplastics have been reported in some industry settings so we know they can cause harm when that occurs. The size of the micro-plastic fibre particles (from the face masks) deposited in the lung tissue will also determine the health impacts - generally size will range from 1mm to 5mm, the larger particles accumulated in the lung tissues are harder to break down and may remain in the lung tissue for a long duration. Particles larger than 5mm width are taught to be too large to enter alveolar region of the lung as the diameter of the alveolar duct won’t allow larger than 5mm particles which is good news.
Well done!
How harmful, if at all, will depend on what quantity and what particle size,is inhaled.
As you have no idea of either figure with respect to surgical masks or if there is any significant inhalation at all you have no idea what problem there is or if there is any issue at all.
Well done for belatedly looking for some vaguely related information that sounds scary but still does not mean that your continual repetition of your "common sense" is in any way meaningful because the situation is not "common" to your experience. Except, that is, for medical staff and the populations of Japanese and Taiwanese cities over many decades..."now look at who’s repeating lol - your denial is amusing especially as it is crystal clear that there is a risk of inhaling polypropylene fibres from face masks into your lung tissues some of which may not be broken down over time and could potentially cause serious harm to your lungs over time. But you totally disregard the risk despite you acknowledging that polypropylene fibres can be inhaled into your lungs. | |||
| |||
"Can’t believe you’re even asking the question! Lol You’ll be asking if it’s true that you’ve heard the world is flat!! ??" Why is it so difficult to believe? Immunity is shown to be short lived with an Omicron infection. Not that short, but short. | |||
"Can’t believe you’re even asking the question! Lol You’ll be asking if it’s true that you’ve heard the world is flat!! ??" Can’t believe you have put this comment without quoting who you are aiming at. | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed. "Same although I did get a dose of something thst knocked me for six plus month later got it again and now can't get rid of flame in my chest | |||
"Does it end? It never started for us. No MSM, no muzzles, no anti - social distancing, no tests, no hand wringing, no jabs, no side effects, no time off work, no illnesses. No sweat! Fools rush in. The next several years are going to be very interesting indeed.
Same although I did get a dose of something thst knocked me for six plus month later got it again and now can't get rid of flame in my chest "Does household transmission end? Yes Does high rates of infection through the community end? Apparently not. | |||
