Check out the FAQ,Terms of Service & Disclaimers by clicking the
link. Please register
to be able to post. By viewing this site you are agreeing to our Terms of Service and Acknowledge our Disclaimers.
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster.
The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website.
By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
I am bumping this thread and draw your attention to AnitaPulm's post (#11) in light of LMonty's post in the closed Face mask thread http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8490 regarding the reality of working in masks.
Just a thought, is there any reason why nurses don't use masks with valves?
There are plenty of FFP3 (99%) respirators out there, with the valves. From my research and testing breathing is very easy and comfortable through them. Although even with FFP3/ P100 masks there is still the risk of viral penetration. I would recommend taking a look at respirators which contain an antimicrobial element to kill the virus.
Too expensive. Hospitals don't have the budgets for masks with valves.
The above Triosyn link is very misleading though I would say very professional in selling something 99.99 % filter as a NOSH approved. That would make it a N100 and it?s only a N95.
Yes yes I know it doesn?t say it?s a N100 but the proof of 99.99% is not from NOSH, NOSH only gives it a N95.
I am not saying this is a bad mask, actually pretty interesting, as with any mask even a N100 it only filtrates what goes through it, not what leaks around.
Somehow I feel there is a online distribution system for these masks, many web pages only sell these or a very limited amount of other protection equipment.
I would want to and do by my PPE from a company that deals in PPE in a larger scale, and not only cropped up because of BF, someone that has been around and stands by what it sells.
ps. The valves thing in hospitals.
An outflow valve is no good for the patient and a inflow valve no good for the nurse.
My understanding is that both NIOSH and CE ratings are based on levels of filtration.
The 99.99% performance of Triosyn respirators isrelated to the triosyn resin, which is stated to trap and kill greater than 99.99% of viruses and bacteria etc.
Again my understanding is that the masks will filter to the regulated level either n95/FFP2, but when they are faced with microbes they kill greater than 99.99% of them. Thus even if the microbes were to pass through the mask, they would tend to pass through dead.
I think Triosyn was founded in 1992, so not a 3M yet, but nevertheless not a fly by night set up just for bird flu.
I have seen other sites out there with additional information on these Triosyn masks.
Birdfluwhispers - Are you a salesperson or do you obtain any income from the sale of masks, or are you related, in any way, whatsoever, to the above site?
I participate on this site out of concern about bird flu for myself, my family and my community. I view this site several times a day to stay abreast of what is going on. I have found this to be a very infomative and find the postings of Henry Niman to be insightful.
I do not post about subjects on any site that I have not thoroughly researched, espousing unsubstantiated opinion like some.
I have found the folk at adveticus to be very helpful when I have spoken to them. I think they have a good product in their respirators. If this site really is about the free sharing of information is there an issue with sharing that I think their product is good and that they are helpful and informative.
I have watched postings where I think (IMHO) people have flawed or incomplete logic and have felt moved to comment when appropriate.
If I have committed some offence in this please tell me. In the meantime I shall cease to post on this forum.
Maybe you could confirm that FluTracker.com is independant and not affiliated/supported by any organisations? Or name those that do support?
I am not offended, I am disappointed and surprised that I have been singled out and had my motives questioned. Especially as I have seen so many blatant and not so blatant posts by people promoting their sites and goods on this and other sites
Have Robert or PKbarbie doll been asked their motives?
PKBARBIE doll has only ever posted twice both in this thread and opened this thread titled with a brand name. Now is that suspicious?
I am knowledgable about this subject and supplied a link to the site/company that helped me to gain some of that knowledge. I have bought Triosyn respirators for myself and family. I have mentioned this before, to buy masks in bulk is a resonable expense and I don't spend money without understanding the product.
Comment