Gransnet forums

Health

So - now masks protect the wearer?

(165 Posts)
ExD Wed 13-Jan-21 17:22:48

To begin with we were told that we wore our masks in order to prevent us from spreading the covid virus to other people - remember "I wear my mask to protect HIM".

Now we're told we wear then to protect ourselves!

How can we be sure this isn't a load of propaganda to make sure we all wear masks? (not that I object to wearing a mask)

M0nica Sun 17-Jan-21 21:25:19

Wearing gloves is no different from going bare handed. At every opportunity going in and out of shops, you use the hand sanitiser. If it works for hands it works for gloves.

I started wearing gloves because I have very dry skin and found that constantly washing my hands or using sanitiser made my skin very sore and rough, so I put a pair of gloves between my hands and the soap and sanitiser.

In fact wearing gloves means I use far more sanitiser than I would without them because when I was worrying about my skin, I used as little sanitiser as possible.

Greeneyedgirl Mon 18-Jan-21 08:47:18

I understand why you have chosen to wear gloves MOnica but if they are of the disposable type their intactness (is that a word?) may be damaged by the alcohol in sanitisers. Reason why gloves arn’t used in clinical situations, ie by phlebotomists.

Gingster Mon 18-Jan-21 08:56:36

We all should have been wearing masks right from the outset.

growstuff Mon 18-Jan-21 09:13:51

This article was published on 29 December and summarises the most recent advice about wearing masks.

www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6625

Evidence is still quite sparse, but that's because there haven't been many trials. That's not surprising because the best way to trial masks would be to get an infected person to breath over some masked and unmasked people, which wouldn't be ethical. Evidence comes from outbreaks, where whole groups of people haven't worn masks (such as choirs and churches) and comparing infection rates when masks have been mandated.

The conclusion is that they should be worn to reduce transmission as there is increasing evidence that airborne transmission is a main source of infection.

M0nica Mon 18-Jan-21 10:55:32

Green-eyed girl I am not wearing them in clinical situations, but when shopping and I only, therefore wear them for short periods.

Either way wearing them is far less damaging and more protective to my hands than putting sanitiser and constant hot water and soap on my hands.

And, as you say, their integrity may be damaged by the alcohol, not is damaged. A fairly low risk, I am quite happy with.

Greeneyedgirl Mon 18-Jan-21 13:39:44

My skin is sensitive so I do sympathise with you MOnica.

I have bought some pricey but skin kind sanitiser, with 70% alcohol, in refillable glass bottles from Neals Yard. I like the fact that it is in reusable glass and they sell larger bottles for refilling.

Tweedle24 Mon 18-Jan-21 14:50:21

After reading about using sanitiser on disposable gloves, I looked up some research on this.

According to the article (sorry, can’t remember where I found it) research shows that using sanitiser on gloves is effective. However, after several uses, the fabric starts to break down. If gloves worn while shopping are discarded after each shopping trip, I would think they are fine to use.

M0nica Mon 18-Jan-21 21:20:36

which is exactly what I do.

savannahluis6 Thu 28-Jan-21 12:10:30

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

BlueSky Thu 28-Jan-21 12:20:39

Just common sense would tell you that masks protect both the wearer and other people. Saying different has caused a lot of harm, as well that the virus affects mainly the over ‘70s. Anybody under 60 felt it wasn’t their problem, while tragically we know how many younger people have died.

M0nica Thu 28-Jan-21 16:28:01

Anybody under 60 felt it wasn’t their problem, while tragically we know how many younger people have died.

Many young people have not died. For under 50s COVID is fatal for less than 1 % of those catching it. For 45-64 year olds it is approximately 5%, and for over 75 year olds it is nearer 15%

MayBee70 Thu 28-Jan-21 16:46:55

If the virus had targeted younger people it would have been taken far more seriously right from the start. The government, imo, are only just taking it seriously now that it seems to be more virulent. I’m obviously not saying that I want young people to be affected: one of the saving graces of the pandemic has been that I haven’t been worried sick about my children and grandchildren albeit still worrying that they’ll catch it.

Elegran Fri 29-Jan-21 08:57:29

Luis at 28-Jan-21 12:10:30 will smell nicer than if he used bleach, but he will still catch it. Do they think our heads button up the back?

Alexa Fri 29-Jan-21 09:27:45

masks that protect the wearer are medical quality.

Please note, masks with valves are not suitable for stopping spread of virus. This is because valves open to let used air escape unfiltered.

Masks with valves are made to protect wearers against dust and other incoming substances, but do not protect others against what has been breathed out.