Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Faceshield

support.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 663 posts

Re: Apple Faceshield

#251

Post by uxp »

epicureanideal wrote: post #219
uxp wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about the money. PPE like face shields are specifically used during procedures that involve significant bodily fluid, like intubation, which is the process of pulling or pushing a tube down a patient's esophagus. Going to to the grocery store does not require a shield. Secondly disposable medical equipment, when used properly within a healthcare environment, is extremely wasteful. For most consumable items u…

"Everybody stocking a "handful" of PPE isn't a scalable solution to maintain a national supply." No, but there's no harm in it either, and some potential benefit in case it takes a few days for the federal government to organize a response. We all assume the government is going to make sure the food supply is maintained, but everyone is also buying some extra food just in case there's a temporary gap. We don't need t…

For what, though? And I'm 100% being honest here, what is the specific situation you are envisioning that requires a face shield in your home?

In a medical setting, shields are typically used in conjunction with eye goggles and respirators when performing procedures that have a tendency to cause or be around splashing body fluids. Outside of someone sneezing or spitting on you directly, I can't think of an analogous situation that I come into on even a rare circumstance that a face shield would protect me from.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#252

Post by kube-system »

snazz wrote: post #214
kube-system wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a couple of typical labels in the US: https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/2025dfde-c877-4043-b91d-978... https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/05122787-1991-4084-869e-755...

The "DO NOT use or mix with other household chemicals, such as..." part should probably go on the front and a little bigger. I can't imagine that everyone would read the whole thing.

It's okay, because they pointed out that it's a violation of federal law to use the product in a way inconsistent with the labeling.

Checkmate people who don't read the label.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#253

Post by alexbanks »

cameldrv wrote: post #206
alexbanks wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more that these would be a pretty involved overstep for regular people to be walking around in. Social distancing + hand washing + a homemade cloth mask is sufficient for regular people. For the same reasons that regular people don't need/shouldn't be wearing N95 masks everywhere, nor should these.

If the argument is that civilians shouldn't wear N95 masks outside, but rather donate them to people who need them even more, fine. However, if the argument is that you shouldn't wear a $1 mask, which provides substantial protection against COVID, because it's not necessary, I would refer you again to the 1000 people that died yesterday that didn't wear an N95 mask. The amount of mental gymnastics you have to do to h…

If your assertion is "They wouldn't have died if they'd worn an N95 mask", I would refer you to basically any literature about what the point of wearing the masks are.

Your overwhelming condescension also make this conversation much harder than it needs to be. I would consider taking a walk and trying to relax.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#254

Post by jacksnipe »

dx87 wrote: post #247
fspeech wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Face shields are more effective than masks at preventing exchange of droplets.(1) They can be cleaned and reused so it may save money and material for the general public to popularize face shields. 1. "There may be some protection from droplets and liquids propelled directly onto the mask, but a faceshield would be a better choice if this is a concern." https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commenta...

Right, but staying home is even more effective at preventing exchange of droplets. The face shields should be going to people who can't stay home and are forced to be around contagious people.

A huge number of Americans cannot stay home and are not healthcare workers. People have bills to pay, and not every non-healthcare business is closed, unfortunately.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#255

Post by catblast »

uxp wrote: post #153
epicureanideal wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that they probably would cost $1 to $5, and take almost no space to store, it wouldn't be a terrible thing for people to have a few if they want them. How many people have a $20 multi-tool that stays in a drawer somewhere? Or some bags of rice "just in case" that end up getting thrown in the trash after being forgotten about in the cabinet for 5 years? It may not be a terrible thing if some percentage of people…

It's not about the money. PPE like face shields are specifically used during procedures that involve significant bodily fluid, like intubation, which is the process of pulling or pushing a tube down a patient's esophagus. Going to to the grocery store does not require a shield. Secondly disposable medical equipment, when used properly within a healthcare environment, is extremely wasteful. For most consumable items u…

> which is the process of pulling or pushing a tube down a patient's esophagus.

In the context of intubation that is most definitely a bad outcome.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#256

Post by gambler »

leipert wrote: post #195

The Czech 3D Printer company Prusa has been on it for a while: https://www.prusa3d.com/covid19/ and they have been open-sourcing the design. You can print it on a 3D printer. Based on that design (and others) makers in Germany have started organizing, so that people can either request shields or supply shields. Organized on Slack and into local distribution hubs. We hace started sharing supplies and even got discount…

What is the point of 3d printing something that clearly needs to be mass-produced in great quantities? Maybe it "feels good", but it's just too slow.

I'm honestly not sure why people don't just use plastic food wrap as a cheap improvised alternative for face shields. It's lightweight, readily available, disposable, fits over any attire and does not restrict visibility.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#257

Post by electricviolet »

epicureanideal wrote: post #219
uxp wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about the money. PPE like face shields are specifically used during procedures that involve significant bodily fluid, like intubation, which is the process of pulling or pushing a tube down a patient's esophagus. Going to to the grocery store does not require a shield. Secondly disposable medical equipment, when used properly within a healthcare environment, is extremely wasteful. For most consumable items u…

"Everybody stocking a "handful" of PPE isn't a scalable solution to maintain a national supply." No, but there's no harm in it either, and some potential benefit in case it takes a few days for the federal government to organize a response. We all assume the government is going to make sure the food supply is maintained, but everyone is also buying some extra food just in case there's a temporary gap. We don't need t…

The harm right now is that there's not even enough PPE for hospitals, so anyone buying a face shield for themselves, if that were possible, would keep a face shields from going to a health worker who needs it more.

A couple months from now, when pressure on the healthcare system is lower and manufacturing capacity is ramped up? Sure, I'm all for it.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#258

Post by m4rtink »

EmilStenstrom wrote: post #244
m4rtink wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm - for example both the main maker space Fablab & local hackerspace Base 48 are making these face shields for medical personel here in Brno, the second largest city of Czech Republic. I've also heard about regional schools using their 3D printers to make those. You can see the shields, complete with the "Prusa" label on the 3D printed parts even in regular news coverage worn by medical personel.

3D-printing is great, but other forms or manufacturing are way faster. That’s how Apple is making 1.000.000 shields per day.

Sure, it you have the industrial tools needed for that. The Prusa shield needs a 3D printer (which many have or know someone that have it) a piece of laminating foil & hole punch (which you likely have if you have laminating foil). This way it can be made locally from local resources.

If you have a factory that can make a face shields by the milion, definitely go for it! Still, you need then to transfer the finished shields to all the many places that need them, which can somtimes be tricky with all the lockdowns and border checks in place.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#259

Post by [deleted] »

antipaul wrote: post #29

This is impressive, compared to what traditional health companies like Pharma are doing. The latter seem mostly to update existing products like faster tests or trying to develop vaccines. Whereas it’s the tech companies which are going a bit beyond their traditional business: Apple making face masks, Google and Apple making screening websites (other examples?) All of which could be done by traditional health compani…

[deleted]

Re: Apple Faceshield

#260

Post by seventytwo »

ALittleLight wrote: post #139

This is awesome and I'm glad companies are doing things like this. It made me interested if face shields are something I should add to my own PPE collection. Very interesting summary of the effectiveness of face shields [1] "Utilizing a cough aerosol simulator loaded with influenza virus (aerosol volume mean diameter of 8.5 μm) and a breathing simulator, Lindsley et al.[16] reported 96% and 92% reductions in the risk…

There are things called PAPRs which are an enclosed version of what you’re taking about.
Post reply on HN