https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html

Probably vaccines, too.

On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:03:51 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>
> Probably vaccines, too.

The Daily Mail exists to provide nut cases like Cursitor Doom with vaguely plausible nonsense to worry about. Somebody like you who is gullible enough take climate change denial propaganda seriously is part of their target demographic, but you really should resist the temptation. I'm not allowed to tell you that it makes you look stupid, but you should be smart enough to work it out for yourself.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On 27/08/2023 15:03, John Larkin wrote:
>
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html

It is the Daily Wail for heavens sake! They only ever do *PANIC* headlines.

Controversial Korean research results tend to be suspect by default
(room temperature superconductors anybody?). They have form...

The Wail are clueless morons determined to panic everybody all the time.
Everything in their eyes either causes cancer or is a superfood.

> Probably vaccines, too.

Better than dying of Covid. Covid vaccines saved many lives.

--
Martin Brown

On 27/08/2023 15:03, John Larkin wrote:
>
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>
> Probably vaccines, too.

I'm puzzled. This article is in the Daily Mail, yet somehow neither
Meghan Markle nor immigrants are implicated. They must have been asleep
on the job.

Seriously, the DM is unmitigated tripe with the aim of keeping the hard
of thinking in a state of permanent fury. They're very good at it.

--
Cheers
Clive

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:03:51 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>
> Probably vaccines, too.

"The sample with the highest amount of TVOCs had 4,808 cubic meters per microgram, which is about 4.8 parts per million."

Looks like the highschool dropouts who wrote the article have problems with units of measure. If you look at Figure 2 measuring emission concentration versus elapsed time, even the worst mask TVOC had declined by ~95%, putting them well well below any threshold for toxicity.

Toxicity is a function of concentration x exposure time. The study shows it's not a problem.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10112860/

On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 16:05:12 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

>On 27/08/2023 15:03, John Larkin wrote:
>>
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>
>It is the Daily Wail for heavens sake! They only ever do *PANIC* headlines.
>
>Controversial Korean research results tend to be suspect by default
>(room temperature superconductors anybody?). They have form...
>
>The Wail are clueless morons determined to panic everybody all the time.
>Everything in their eyes either causes cancer or is a superfood.

So if they link to an NIH study, the study becomes nonsense?

On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 09:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:03:51?AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>>
>> Probably vaccines, too.
>
>
>"The sample with the highest amount of TVOCs had 4,808 cubic meters per microgram, which is about 4.8 parts per million."
>
>Looks like the highschool dropouts who wrote the article have problems with units of measure. If you look at Figure 2 measuring emission concentration versus elapsed time, even the worst mask TVOC had declined by ~95%, putting them well well below any threshold for toxicity.
>
>Toxicity is a function of concentration x exposure time. The study shows it's not a problem.
>
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10112860/
>

"In some KF94 masks, TVOC concentration reached over 4000 µg m–3,
posing a risk to human health (based on indoor air quality guidelines
established by the German Environment Agency)."

Yikes. You would inhale milligrams of the gunk.

Run them through your clothes dryer before you wear them. Or wear them
improperly, which most people do.

On 27/08/2023 20:00, John Larkin wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 16:05:12 +0100, Martin Brown
> <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 27/08/2023 15:03, John Larkin wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>>
>> It is the Daily Wail for heavens sake! They only ever do *PANIC* headlines.
>>
>> Controversial Korean research results tend to be suspect by default
>> (room temperature superconductors anybody?). They have form...
>>
>> The Wail are clueless morons determined to panic everybody all the time.
>> Everything in their eyes either causes cancer or is a superfood.
>
> So if they link to an NIH study, the study becomes nonsense?

They have deliberately misrepresented it to panic the hard of thinking.

--
Martin Brown

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 3:05:58 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 09:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:03:51?AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> >> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
> >>
> >> Probably vaccines, too.
> >
> >
> >"The sample with the highest amount of TVOCs had 4,808 cubic meters per microgram, which is about 4.8 parts per million."
> >
> >Looks like the highschool dropouts who wrote the article have problems with units of measure. If you look at Figure 2 measuring emission concentration versus elapsed time, even the worst mask TVOC had declined by ~95%, putting them well well below any threshold for toxicity.
> >
> >Toxicity is a function of concentration x exposure time. The study shows it's not a problem.
> >
> >https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10112860/
> >
> "In some KF94 masks, TVOC concentration reached over 4000 µg m–3,
> posing a risk to human health (based on indoor air quality guidelines
> established by the German Environment Agency)."
>
> Yikes. You would inhale milligrams of the gunk.
>
> Run them through your clothes dryer before you wear them. Or wear them
> improperly, which most people do.

If any of this is valid, there should be an epidemiological study to show the increase in affects. Did anyone report that?

It's easy to do a study in a lab, that does not translate to the real world.. Putting an NIH brand on the study does not change that.

The paper was written by professionals to be read by other professionals in the field. When read by those who know nothing of the matter, many false conclusions are often drawn.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 16:05:12 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

>On 27/08/2023 15:03, John Larkin wrote:
>>
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>
>It is the Daily Wail for heavens sake! They only ever do *PANIC* headlines.
>
>Controversial Korean research results tend to be suspect by default
>(room temperature superconductors anybody?). They have form...
>
>The Wail are clueless morons determined to panic everybody all the time.
>Everything in their eyes either causes cancer or is a superfood.
>
>> Probably vaccines, too.
>
>Better than dying of Covid. Covid vaccines saved many lives.

OK then. Don't wear the N95 masks types.

Just wear the regular old surgical mask instead and all will be well.

boB

On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 14:34:37 -0700, boB <boB@K7IQ.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 16:05:12 +0100, Martin Brown
><'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On 27/08/2023 15:03, John Larkin wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>>
>>It is the Daily Wail for heavens sake! They only ever do *PANIC* headlines.
>>
>>Controversial Korean research results tend to be suspect by default
>>(room temperature superconductors anybody?). They have form...
>>
>>The Wail are clueless morons determined to panic everybody all the time.
>>Everything in their eyes either causes cancer or is a superfood.
>>
>>> Probably vaccines, too.
>>
>>Better than dying of Covid. Covid vaccines saved many lives.
>
>OK then. Don't wear the N95 masks types.

I can imagine that panic-level manufacturing of tens of billions of
masks in certain countries could have quality issues.

>
>Just wear the regular old surgical mask instead and all will be well.
>
>boB
>
>

A Groucho mask would be effective in enforcing social distancing.

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:05:58 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 09:54:26 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:03:51?AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> >> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
> >>
> >> Probably vaccines, too.
> >
> >
> >"The sample with the highest amount of TVOCs had 4,808 cubic meters per microgram, which is about 4.8 parts per million."
>
> >Looks like the highschool dropouts who wrote the article have problems with units of measure. If you look at Figure 2 measuring emission concentration versus elapsed time, even the worst mask TVOC had declined by ~95%, putting them well well below any threshold for toxicity.
> >
> >Toxicity is a function of concentration x exposure time. The study shows it's not a problem.
> >
> >https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10112860/
> >
> "In some KF94 masks, TVOC concentration reached over 4000 µg m–3,
> posing a risk to human health (based on indoor air quality guidelines
> established by the German Environment Agency)."
>
> Yikes. You would inhale milligrams of the gunk.

It's just the 'new-mask' smell that's hazardous. At 2 liters per breath, ten per
minute... well, your 8-hour day will have seven healthful ones after those
first stinky minutes. The peak outgassing reached, is not a daily work condition.

Since K94 is a Korean standard, it doesn't have to meet a German
air-quality criterion, and I'm unlikely to encounter those masks anyhow.

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:03:51 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12443319/Mask-study-published-NIH-suggests-N95-Covid-masks-expose-wearers-dangerous-level-toxic-compounds-linked-seizures-cancer.html
>
> Probably vaccines, too.

It's a risk benefit tradeoff like everything else:

It may be time to break out the masks against Covid, some experts say

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/23/health/masks-covid-surge-wellness/index.html