This link at Insty drove me to read the comments. One in particular by someone named Doctormhl1 states the following.
Face masks offer insufficient protection against Covid-19.infection. It has been demonstrated that the virus can enter the conjunctiva of the eye. Once on the conjunctiva, tears wash the virus into the back of the nasopharynx via the nasal-lacrimal duct. Thus eye protection in the form of tight-fitting goggles is also a necessary requirement. Eyeglasses and facial shields are also inadequate protection because they fail to completely seal off the eyes.
Why has Dr. Fauci failed to warn about proper eye protection in the prevention of Covid-19 infection?
Well, that’s just another means for viruses to enter the human body. We can’t stop it, whatever it is, and however effective it is against the human body. We may as well drive through it. I’ve said that from the beginning.
I’ve already discussed this in detail. Filters work (primarily) in one of two ways. (1) particle interception because the filter fibers are closer together than the particle diameter, or (2) electrostatic capture.
The virus is smaller than the distance between the two fibers. Next, the virus in question (SARS-CoV-2) is non-polar. You may as well try to capture a mosquito with a chain link fence.
So this doctor’s pathway is just another reason to listen to what I’ve said before. In order to be effective, you would have to wear an OSHA-approved, fit tested full face respirator, including both a HEPA filter and a charcoal filter. The HEPA may be good for viruses contained within water droplets (until evaporation by the air stream), but the charcoal is the only real chance of particle interception.
Anything else is a sham. Anything else is a hoax. I’ve also told you what I would find necessary to believe that anything else would be a successful strategy: full testing and calculations (to develop models) performed by physicists and engineers, assessing particle sizes and their distribution, filters and their efficiency, retention time, an assessment using CFD (computational fluid dynamics) to assess the diminution of effectiveness due to air flow versus face velocity and benchmarking against empirical data, and full disclosure of mathematical and physics models for public review.
No. Not by doctors and epidemiologists. They know nothing about this sort of thing. By engineers and physicists.
To date, no one has proposed anything even approaching this level of analysis, much less actually done it.
I stand by everything I’ve said. And by the way, I don’t wear masks.