@LisaForKansas @wsbgnl Still, I think it mentioned that they were all trained respirator users who had completed fit tests.
Expecting the same use effectiveness from the public without even so much as a single PSA (afaik) seems unlikely.

@LisaForKansas@wsbgnl尽管如此，我认为它提到了他们都是经过培训的呼吸器使用者，他们都完成了适合性测试。
即使没有一个单独的PSA（afaik），也不可能期望公众有同样的使用效果。

@LisaForKansas @wsbgnl This study is much better, testing a wider variety of masks on more test subjects (chosen for a variety of face sizes).

@LisaForKansas@wsbgnl这项研究要好得多，在更多受试者身上测试了更多种类的口罩（根据不同的脸型选择）。

@LisaForKansas @wsbgnl People with different sized or shaped faces (and/or facial hair) would probably produce different numbers. We don't know the range.

@LisaForKansas@wsbgnl拥有不同大小或形状面部（和/或面部毛发）的人可能会产生不同的数字。我们不知道范围。

@LisaForKansas @wsbgnl Take that study with a grain of salt. There was one male and one female volunteer testing the masks. They probably knew how to use respirators generally (it was done in a hospital I think) e.g. bend nose clip at least. General public without training often doesn't have a clue.

@LisaForKansas@wsbgnl对这项研究持怀疑态度。有一名男性和一名女性志愿者在测试口罩。他们可能知道一般情况下如何使用呼吸器（我想这是在医院里做的），例如至少弯曲鼻夹。未经培训的普通公众通常没有任何线索。

@Mr_Inquisitr @drensber @ann_mcnitt @ignorantprophet @ayshakhoury @CIDRAP No idea. The human challenge trial report was interesting (reported a single droplet was enough) but small sample size and limited applicability to airborne transmission.

@调查官先生@drensber@ann_mcnitt@ignorantprophet@ayshakhoury@CIDRAP不知道。人类挑战试验报告很有趣（报告称一滴就足够了），但样本量小，对空气传播的适用性有限。

@wsbgnl Use of PPE is a hazardous environment (eg. workplace) is effective and is NOT analogous to one way masking, because when one must remove the PPE, one LEAVES THE HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENT before doing so. This often can't be done by individuals in many public settings.

@wsbgnl使用PPE是一种危险环境（如工作场所），是有效的，与单向掩蔽不同，因为当必须移除PPE时，必须在移除前离开危险环境。在许多公共场合，个人往往无法做到这一点。

@wsbgnl "One way masking" is a dishonest sham. People advocating it understand this reality but they cynically push the concept as a way to promote a faulty individualized safety model.

@wsbgnl“单向掩蔽”是一个不诚实的骗局。倡导这一理念的人理解这一现实，但他们愤世嫉俗地将这一理念作为推广错误的个性化安全模式的一种方式。

@wsbgnl It's also impossible for people to keep masks on fully time in many settings such as long distance travel. It is necessary to remove it for hydration, eating, and taking medicine. Lack of universal masking means that the environment in which it is removed is far more hazardous.

@wsbgnl在许多场合，比如长途旅行，人们也不可能一直戴着口罩。为了补充水分、进食和服药，有必要将其移除。缺乏通用掩蔽意味着移除掩蔽的环境要危险得多。

@_mbdr_ Do you really wonder or is this rhetorical?

@_mbdr_uu你真的很好奇，还是这是一种修辞？

@misael_pandawto @RougeMatisse @Gab_H_R It does happen faster, you can see it right there on that chart. But still plenty of time up to about 5-7 days when there isn't much difference yet. That's plenty of opportunity to transmit.

@misael_pandawto@RougeMatisse@Gab_H_R确实发生得更快，你可以在图表上看到。但仍然有足够的时间，大约5-7天，那时还没有太大的差异。这是很多传播的机会。

@ar11175007 @barristernola @jmcrookston It's a function of both.

@ar11175007@barristernola@jmcrookston这是两者的函数。

@JeffCavanagh1 @barristernola @jmcrookston Only 30% in the US has 3+ doses. It was never well communicated why people need it and many don't think they do. During the few periods of high demand (e.g. december), it was hard to get.
If that's "fully vaxed", US is effectively an unvaxed society and needs to act accordingly.

@JeffCavanagh1@barristernola@jmcrookston在美国只有30%有3+剂量。为什么人们需要它，很多人认为他们不需要，这一点从未得到很好的沟通。在需求旺盛的几个时期（例如12月），很难获得。
如果这是“完全无效的”，那么美国实际上是一个没有负担的社会，需要采取相应的行动。

@JeffCavanagh1 @barristernola @jmcrookston "Fully vaxed" is two doses. That was never changed

@JeffCavanagh1@barristernola@jmcrookston“完全VAX”是两剂。这一点从未改变

@Un1tedA1rlines @evan_greer You need to label this as parody if you don't want to be banned for impersonation.

@Un1tedA1rlines@evan_greer如果你不想因为模仿而被禁止，你需要将其标记为模仿。

@First_tehReaver @evan_greer Not hard.
"For flights that depart after"...

@首先，埃文·格里尔并不难。
“对于在……之后起飞的航班”。。。

@GayTomCruz @KouvalisOf @coy0tetr1ckst3r @Annalisa840917 @Qwertz0 @evan_greer Not binary.

@GayTomCruz@KouvalisOf@coy0tet1ckst3r@Annalisa840917@Qwertz0@evan_greer非二进制。

@evan_greer They didn't NEED to change policies at all (and certainly not mid-flight), they chose to.
Most airlines had their own mask requirement before there was a federal mandate.

@他们根本不需要改变政策（当然也不需要中途改变），而是选择了改变。
在联邦政府授权之前，大多数航空公司都有自己的口罩要求。

@flowermusickids This is both pre-delta data and averages (also rough somewhat made up estimates but we can mostly ignore that). Averages mean some transmissions happen faster, some interactions don't transmit even over a longer period.

@flowermusickids这是delta前的数据和平均值（也有一些粗略的估计，但我们基本上可以忽略）。平均值意味着有些传输速度更快，有些交互甚至在更长的时间内也不会传输。

@Mr_Inquisitr @drensber @ann_mcnitt @ignorantprophet @ayshakhoury @CIDRAP They're averages. Sometimes infections happen with much shorter exposure, sometimes no infection despite longer exposure. Also does not account for ventilation or distance.
Distance on transit is often VERY close, so likely faster than these "average" exposures.

@调查官先生@drensber@ann_mcnitt@ignorantprophet@ayshakhoury@CIDRAP他们是平均数。有时感染发生在接触时间短得多的情况下，有时即使接触时间长也不会感染。也不考虑通风或距离。
在运输途中的距离通常非常近，因此可能比这些“平均”暴露速度更快。

@MelpomeneMel Never thought they would do this unironically, but here we are.
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@梅尔波梅内梅尔从没想过他们会用电子设备来做这件事，但我们到了。
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...