Visualization shows exactly how face masks stop COVID-19 transmission

Jun 30, 2020
2
2
15
First, while this was very instructive, it would have helped to include a discussion of particle size blocked by the various masks. However, regardless of WHAT gets through it is also important to know HOW FAR it gets, so very helpful.

Second, I would like to have seen a visualization of a hand/handkerchief/elbow sneeze as well, as this should be an acceptable option for people that can't wear masks (e.g., asthma).

Third, all of those visualizations make me concerned about a massive spike in conjunctivitis (pink eye) and other ocular issues as every mask appears to result in blow-back into the cougher's eyes. Yes, pink eye is less serious than COVID, but it's also highly contagious and I don't know what other ocular risks would come from those germs.

Finally, if I am regularly coughing or sneezing I would probably not be going out regardless. The bigger issue being discussed is the value of a mask in regular activities without coughing or sneezing or exercising or singing, but simply walking near people in a store or restaurant and just breathing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wanda and zframer
Jun 30, 2020
1
2
15
But some cloth masks appear to work better than others at stopping the spread of potentially infectious droplets.

Visualization shows exactly how face masks stop COVID-19 transmission : Read more
Please correct the article -- in one place it says: "droplets traveled only about 2.5 inches (1 centimeter) forward from the face. " This measurement equivalent for inches vs cm. is the other way around - 2.5 centimeters equals 1 inch. So 2.5 inches is a lot more centimeters than one - it is 6.25 cm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wanda and zframer
Apr 3, 2020
4
1
15
I seem to be confused. To prove your point A fake head was used with power air exhaust expelling through the tube at the mouth. Would the diameter of the tube not change the type of air flow compared to that of A human? Also does the fluid used have the same weight of fluid expelled from A human? This would change the distance of travel. Also the size of the molecules would seem to also play here. What is the air flow rate of A human breathing and the rate when they cough and was that figured in when the test were run. Since the material will become moist from our breathing was the fake fluid heated to that of A humans breath? Was the test ran with moist cloth like it is when we exhale through time after time?
With todays tech couldn't A real human with the virus wear A mask and breath through the mask while being measured? Also A cough from the virus infected person would give you distance and volume that could also be measured.
This report makes it sound like something done on youtube not in A Scientific Lab.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zframer
Jan 4, 2020
33
6
55
Useful information, so thank you, although I do agree with some of the reservations expressed by others on this thread.
I think these insights might be extended to strong additional recommendations for social distancing and minimizing face-to-face conversations (even through masks) with anyone not in one's household. We must not be emitting "spit" or vapor into anyone else's space while this plague is with us.
 
Dec 3, 2019
14
3
35
First, while this was very instructive, it would have helped to include a discussion of particle size blocked by the various masks. However, regardless of WHAT gets through it is also important to know HOW FAR it gets, so very helpful.

Second, I would like to have seen a visualization of a hand/handkerchief/elbow sneeze as well, as this should be an acceptable option for people that can't wear masks (e.g., asthma).

Third, all of those visualizations make me concerned about a massive spike in conjunctivitis (pink eye) and other ocular issues as every mask appears to result in blow-back into the cougher's eyes. Yes, pink eye is less serious than COVID, but it's also highly contagious and I don't know what other ocular risks would come from those germs.

Finally, if I am regularly coughing or sneezing I would probably not be going out regardless. The bigger issue being discussed is the value of a mask in regular activities without coughing or sneezing or exercising or singing, but simply walking near people in a store or restaurant and just breathing.
what you are talking about is a different experiment.

something like this addresses some of your questions. At least you can see why a human looks like expelling droplets

it doesn't show masks, but it's looking at different elements
 
Jun 30, 2020
1
1
15
I am most likely one of the most conservative, politically active member of the blog community. So I'd like to approach this subject from a little different angle. There are a whole bunch of people who oppose wearing masks because they say requiring the use of masks violates their Constitutional Rights. As a Conservative Constitutionalist in the spirit of Jefferson, I beg to differ with my conservative friends.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it cover a situation like we have right now. The Founders could have never foreseen such a virus, or the results from it. The Constitution is a roadmap for the formation of new laws to cover situations which are not mentioned in this document. No one could have looked into a Crystal Ball and received revelation that the COVID-19 would hit the World population as hard as it has. While it isn't the worst epidemic or pandemic in World History, it is still a deadly virus, especially for those with compromised health conditions. Also it is obvious this virus is easily spread from one person to another, as well as from animal-Human contact.

Requiring masks to be worn in public is not unconstitutional, because it is covered under the General Welfare Clause of our Constitution. Lawmakers have the duty and responsibility to introduce and pass legislation which affect the whole of the population. Wearing of masks has been proven to curb the spread of COVID-19 in the general population, and the wearing of R-95 or more effective mask have been proven to protect medical workers from the virus. So why is there so much opposition from the conservative side of the isle concerning Covid-19?

Partly it has to do with the principle of freedom of choice. But this principle falls flat because NOT wearing a mask is a danger to everyone they come in contact with. It has been shown non-medical masks, protect others more than they do wearers of the mask. To go into public and be potentially responsible for making other sick is irresponsible

The other part is, we conservatives have identified huge errors in both domestic and foreign policy, many of which have no Historical, Scientific, or Political facts or president to back the laws being made, or Treaties being entered into. In fact many decisions made by our government blatantly violate the Constitution and principles of the Founding Fathers. Therefore we keep a watchful eye on politicians and Bills introduced in Congress, as well as Treaties being approved by the Senate.

I am a strict Jeffersonian Conservative Constitutionalist, who relies on facts, to make pragmatic decisions about the issues.

If you have any regard for the health and safety of others, WEAR A MASK!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cecilia fx
Dec 3, 2019
14
3
35
I am a strict Jeffersonian Conservative Constitutionalist, who relies on facts, to make pragmatic decisions about the issues.

If you have any regard for the health and safety of others, WEAR A MASK!
Thank you. It's always nice to see logic and respect for science influencing behavior
 
Jul 1, 2020
1
0
10
I am most likely one of the most conservative, politically active member of the blog community. So I'd like to approach this subject from a little different angle. There are a whole bunch of people who oppose wearing masks because they say requiring the use of masks violates their Constitutional Rights. As a Conservative Constitutionalist in the spirit of Jefferson, I beg to differ with my conservative friends.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it cover a situation like we have right now. The Founders could have never foreseen such a virus, or the results from it. The Constitution is a roadmap for the formation of new laws to cover situations which are not mentioned in this document. No one could have looked into a Crystal Ball and received revelation that the COVID-19 would hit the World population as hard as it has. While it isn't the worst epidemic or pandemic in World History, it is still a deadly virus, especially for those with compromised health conditions. Also it is obvious this virus is easily spread from one person to another, as well as from animal-Human contact.

Requiring masks to be worn in public is not unconstitutional, because it is covered under the General Welfare Clause of our Constitution. Lawmakers have the duty and responsibility to introduce and pass legislation which affect the whole of the population. Wearing of masks has been proven to curb the spread of COVID-19 in the general population, and the wearing of R-95 or more effective mask have been proven to protect medical workers from the virus. So why is there so much opposition from the conservative side of the isle concerning Covid-19?

Partly it has to do with the principle of freedom of choice. But this principle falls flat because NOT wearing a mask is a danger to everyone they come in contact with. It has been shown non-medical masks, protect others more than they do wearers of the mask. To go into public and be potentially responsible for making other sick is irresponsible

The other part is, we conservatives have identified huge errors in both domestic and foreign policy, many of which have no Historical, Scientific, or Political facts or president to back the laws being made, or Treaties being entered into. In fact many decisions made by our government blatantly violate the Constitution and principles of the Founding Fathers. Therefore we keep a watchful eye on politicians and Bills introduced in Congress, as well as Treaties being approved by the Senate.

I am a strict Jeffersonian Conservative Constitutionalist, who relies on facts, to make pragmatic decisions about the issues.

If you have any regard for the health and safety of others, WEAR A MASK!
That's an absurd statement. Wearing a mask for a healthy person has absolutely nothing to do with regard for the health and safety of others.
 
Jul 3, 2020
2
0
10
Some of the questions and reservations that people in this forum have could be addressed by looking at the actual article. On some sites, unfortunately, I've had no luck providing links. I post a comment with a link, and my post goes away. I'm not sure if that will happen here, haven't checked the rules for this forum closely. I'll provide a link to the article. If all goes well, I'll have more to say later.

 
Jul 3, 2020
2
0
10
I seem to be confused. To prove your point A fake head was used with power air exhaust expelling through the tube at the mouth. Would the diameter of the tube not change the type of air flow compared to that of A human? Also does the fluid used have the same weight of fluid expelled from A human? This would change the distance of travel. Also the size of the molecules would seem to also play here. What is the air flow rate of A human breathing and the rate when they cough and was that figured in when the test were run. Since the material will become moist from our breathing was the fake fluid heated to that of A humans breath? Was the test ran with moist cloth like it is when we exhale through time after time?
With todays tech couldn't A real human with the virus wear A mask and breath through the mask while being measured? Also A cough from the virus infected person would give you distance and volume that could also be measured.
This report makes it sound like something done on youtube not in A Scientific Lab.
This study was definitely done in an engineering lab, and the report was published in a professional journal. Some of your questions are directly addressed in the journal article. For example, the question about the moistening of the cloth is mentioned as a possible problem. It is common for research reports to mention problems not directly addressed by a study. No study can answer all questions. This is the link:


It is important to note that the authors make no claim to have conducted a definitive scientific experiment showing exactly how and under what conditions the virus is spread and exact measures on how to eliminate or at least reduce the spread. Indeed, the authors are quite explicit that theirs was a qualitative, not a quantitative study. From the report:

"We outline the procedure for setting up simple visualization experiments using easily available materials, which may help healthcare professionals, medical researchers, and manufacturers in assessing the effectiveness of face masks and other personal protective equipment qualitatively."

The researchers also note that the visualizations can be useful in explaining to the general public the rationale behind social distancing and mask wearing. In all, I'd say that the researchers did a good job of accomplishing what they set out to do: Conduct and report on an initial qualitative study which can be used in the field by health care providers. The study can also be expanded and improved upon by those wishing to do more quantitative research.
 
Jul 4, 2020
4
0
10
Really one need such apparatus to know a pressurized flow like a cough pra sneeze reaches longer than a normal flow?
And this regards only those who are sneezing or coughing, the SYMPTOMATICS.
Thays the whole reason WHO still does not recommend NOT symptomatics to wear and breathe through these dirt/dust/fungus/bacteria accumulators "cloth" masks
 
Jul 9, 2020
1
0
10
I seem to be confused. To prove your point A fake head was used with power air exhaust expelling through the tube at the mouth. Would the diameter of the tube not change the type of air flow compared to that of A human? Also does the fluid used have the same weight of fluid expelled from A human? This would change the distance of travel. Also the size of the molecules would seem to also play here. What is the air flow rate of A human breathing and the rate when they cough and was that figured in when the test were run. Since the material will become moist from our breathing was the fake fluid heated to that of A humans breath? Was the test ran with moist cloth like it is when we exhale through time after time?
With todays tech couldn't A real human with the virus wear A mask and breath through the mask while being measured? Also A cough from the virus infected person would give you distance and volume that could also be measured.
This report makes it sound like something done on youtube not in A Scientific Lab.
... It's evident you haven't read the full text article. Here you go: https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/5.0016018
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY