The Political Cartoon/Image/Meme Thread

  • Thread starter Danoff
  • 8,557 comments
  • 298,668 views
1,425
Netherlands
Netherlands
1631277442060.jpg
 

Scaff

Moderator
26,157
United Kingdom
He/Him
ScaffUK
ScaffGTP
Damn I also forgot to point out that his pore size info is also a mishmash of made-up crap and deliberate misinformation.

A cheap disposable mask has an average permeability of 0.37 µm (microns)
A Surgical mask has an average permeability of 0.34 µm (microns)
An n95 mask has an average permeability of 0.26 µm (microns)

This is despite the pore diameters being as follows:

Disposable: 20 to 100 µm (microns)
Surgical: 10 to 100 µm (microns)
N95: 10 to 65 µm (microns)

The rather simple reason being that none of these masks are made of a single layer, but rather multiple layers and they all (unsurprisingly and counter to the videos claim) exists as 3d structures, as such these larger (65 to 100 µm/micron) pores are crisscrossed over each other, with the end result being absurdly low levels of permeability even for the cheapest masks.

This is however why single layer cloth masks are not even close to being as effective as the cheapest multi-layer mask or filter insert (another false equivalence from the video).

So the 62 µm (microns) particles he's trying to scare people about, not an issue, not that I'm sure a peer reviewed and cited source will be a valid source for @VBR when compared to YouTube.

 
Last edited:
8,660
United States
Marin County
Damn I also forgot to point out that his pore size info is also a mishmash of made-up crap and deliberate misinformation.

A cheap disposable mask has an average permeability of 0.37 µm (microns)
A Surgical mask has an average permeability of 0.34 µm (microns)
An n95 mask has an average permeability of 0.26 µm (microns)

This is despite the pore diameters being as follows:

Disposable: 20 to 100 µm (microns)
Surgical: 10 to 100 µm (microns)
N95: 10 to 65 µm (microns)

The rather simple reason being that none of these masks are made of a single layer, but rather multiple layers and they all (unsurprisingly and counter to the videos claim) exists as 3d structures, as such these larger (65 to 100 µm/micron) pores are crisscrossed over each other, with the end result being absurdly low levels of permeability even for the cheapest masks.

This is however why single layer cloth masks are not even close to being as effective as the cheapest multi-layer mask or filter insert (another false equivalence from the video).

So the 62 µm (microns) particles he's trying to scare people about, not an issue, not that I'm sure a peer reviewed and cited source will be a valid source for @VBR when compared to YouTube.

Don't N95 masks (maybe others) also have electrostatic properties that trap particles? There might have even been a 3rd trapping property they have that I'm not rememebering.
 

Scaff

Moderator
26,157
United Kingdom
He/Him
ScaffUK
ScaffGTP
Don't N95 masks (maybe others) also have electrostatic properties that trap particles? There might have even been a 3rd trapping property they have that I'm not rememebering.
Quite possibly, which makes them even more efficient at what they do. All of which makes the claims made in the video even more dangerously inaccurate.