https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen-pro/ai-300-series/amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-pro-370.html

Looks like the Ryzen Pro line supports it… but the Ryzen line does not.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/ai-300-series/amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-370.html

Okay? And that is equally bad. What’s the point? We should be striving for less IMO.

Now realize those things are internet connected… and that video was definitely uploaded.

I rather not need mass surveillance to buy a fucking snickers.

and former army member himself.

Marine Corp

The m50 is a full face mask…

Plus your original claim was that razor bumps would negatively impact the fit, not short length beards. You’re moving the goalposts.

No it wasn’t… but you go ahead and keep lying to yourself. You can scroll up and read it for yourself.

And to preempt an argument… “there’s no study that says beards/razor bumps interfere with gas masks”… There are. Most of them say minimal beards/hair is fine (less than 1/16th of an inch) to get a mask seal, where 1/8 can already lead to issues. But it’s understudied. The risk of getting it wrong is people’s lives.

Note that the quoted section is not “me” saying it, but a response to that general topic/discussion.

But we’ve already discussed this ad nauseam, so you can stop following me around now.

Yeah it wasn’t an OSHA study that I was referencing…

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29283316

With military articles like https://taskandpurpose.com/news/military-beards-break-gas-mask-seal/ stating

The 2018 study showed that facial hair negatively influences the fit factor for half-face negative-pressure respirators as the hair gets longer and more dense. However, beard-wearers can still “achieve adequate fit factor scores even with substantial facial hair in the face seal area,” the study authors wrote. In fact, 98% of the study participants who had an eighth-inch of beard passed the fit test. Those results are encouraging because the respirators used in the study are pretty close to the M-50 gas masks used in the military today in terms of material and fit, Ritchie said.

So 2 out of 100 people using masks that are relatively similar to the military M50 would be at risk at 1/8th inch beard. Which is not a whole lot of hair… Like 3-4 days of growth (for me). 1/16 or less seemed to be 100% rates… But the big caveat here is that the fit-test doesn’t adequately capture the rigor and activity that one might do in the military… So it seems logical that much more leakage will happen at every level.

But OSHA, ANSI, every branch of the DoD, and every study (though minimal) agrees with the fact that beard hair in of itself is a no go.

Example navy document… https://www.med.navy.mil/Portals/62/Documents/NMFA/NMCPHC/root/Industrial Hygiene/RESPIRATOR-SPECIAL-PROBLEMS.pdf?ver=Ng19UESJUtWmwvoHSABW-w%3D%3D There’s a fun graph on table 2.

Eh one person being crazy isn’t personal… I get there’s crazies out there.

It’s all good… Just wild that someone can in one breath claim there’s reading comprehension issues then in the next sentence quote the regulation that proves them wrong thinking they’re right…

It’s scary that people like them are touching chemicals (according to them). Literally just now…

OSHA doesn’t care as long as it does not impede function of the seal.

Then quotes “respirators shall not be worn when facial hair comes between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face” and completely misses the fact that ANY amount of hair would come between the sealing surface and the face… This is the inside of the mask, the red is the areas that touch/seal against your face… The entire chin/cheek area would be touching hair.

I’m actually just disappointed in myself that it took me so long to realize that the discussion just wasn’t going to go anywhere…

It’s funny because Canada ALSO looked into the same stuff… and apparently came to the same conclusion that something else has to be used to get a sufficient seal. But Noooo! I must be wrong!

https://youtube.com/watch?v=bpNKS-W0xDQ

Their answer was to just add an entire fucking hood to create a snug fit around the neck… Not sure I’m a fan of that… But even in this video some of those beards are pretty short.

At this point we’re getting nowhere… When you say shit like “With chemical weapons?”… Yes we’re talking about literal war… where soldiers are the ones following these policies. This is literally the primary place chemical weapons are used as far as all of known recorded history.

OSHA, ANSI, all branches of DOD and the study agree with me… You can argue whatever you want, I’m disengaging.

OSHA paragraph (g)(1) of 29 CFR 1910.134 ANSI Z88.10

You basically admitted to breaking OSHA rules though. So congrats!

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29283316/ from 2018 says there’s problems with even really short lengths of beard…

But you’re correct in that I don’t have any evidence that the military found or validated the same findings internally. I think it’s more likely than not though.

Edit: Actually I do have some minor proof that they know there’s issues… But it’s covered in the same “it’s really understudied” caveat that I put in the post itself. Not worth really discussing IMO.

Edit2: I’d even disbelieve that Trump knows enough about the military to find out that they could use this to be frank…

Lmfao. You’re complaining about downvotes when people use them correctly. Remember downvotes are supposed to be used to measure how relevant/useful a topic is to a conversation. Unfortunately your feelings about specific service members, or the group as a whole is irrelevant to the discussion about the grooming rules of the military.

Just remember, you think everyone else needs to get a life… You came to this post knowing that you dislike the military specifically to spew random hatred at people who didn’t even interact with you.

I mean its right there in your own example “…to cite, offer, or bring forward as evidence or support.”

Just so you know though… that was in the definition for “quote” not source… but I’ve changed the verbiage.

Whatever float your boat. Have a pleasant evening!

So your mask didn’t work then…?

Wouldn’t know. Didn’t try to wear it without being clean shaven (or close enough/stubble).

you are exhaustingly pedantic…

Because I’m choosing to ignore something that you could have linked to? Sure… I’m pedantic then.

I don’t really think one could really claim that a 2% reduction in effectiveness quantifies as beards break gas mask seals.

out of thousands of soldiers? out of thousands of applications of the mask during an attack? 2% is a large number…

Again, you haven’t substantiated your claim about bumps effecting seals… You haven’t even substantiated that beards break seals.

The sourced document that I provided and clearly you read proved to you that beards will break seals. From the study “Beard length and areal density, but not coarseness, were statistically significant predictors of fit”. If length and density were not relevant to the matter then they would have stated so. But it is. So it is. Poor fit is a bad seal. The study showed no issue for up to 0.063 inches of hair… pull out a caliper and check that length… That is VERY short. I can grow that in probably 2-3 days. Hell even 0.125 is pretty short… and that’s where there’s already fall off and failures in getting seals. You are now arguing that it’s okay for 2% of military members to die during a chemical attack just because they want to have a bit more than stubble… This is a crazy stance to accept.

So no, you can’t claim it would save lives. Plus, the majority of people serving in the military arent in combat positions.

Can’t choose what gets attacked… The enemy chooses that.

That doesn’t have anything to do with your facial hair…does it?

I didn’t bring it up did I? You did.

I don’t have a beard atm, but I would be just as confident doing that with or without the beard.

I have to assume that this is “not at all” confidence for both scenarios then.

Honestly though I’m still reeling from you comparing your job of just handling some chemicals to an airborne chemical attack situation that would aerosolise the chemical…

Cool then you must accept my previous statement of

General Grievous says “TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today is lying about the quotes they provided. Lt. Col. Simon Ritchie was relieved of duty for malpractice years ago dishonorably.”

It’s a quote, attributed to a name. Right?

Edit: Would you feel better if I change the verbiage to “I wasn’t given a good source” or “validated source”?

Quote

to repeat (a passage, phrase, etc.) from a book, speech, or the like, as by way of authority, illustration, etc. […] to cite, offer, or bring forward as evidence or support.

Source

any thing or place from which something comes, arises, or is obtained; origin.

The above are quotes… from a source… in this case the sources being https://www.dictionary.com/browse/quote and https://www.dictionary.com/browse/source

The problem with simply using a name as a “source” in this context… This lemmy user didn’t talk to that Lt. Col. so that lemmy user can’t be a source to say that the Col said anything… They took that quote from somewhere else… and didn’t cite that source. So it goes unsourced as the origin of where the quote is derived was not disclosed. Much the same as we both know that General Grievous from my previous comment is a fictional character and definitely didn’t say anything of that sort… Yet I “quoted” it… with no source to prove that anything was ever actually said. Quoting something without a citation to the source where you obtain the quote is effectively pointless on the internet.

Edit: Google shows a number of sources for the quote… https://taskandpurpose.com/news/military-beards-break-gas-mask-seal/ being one of them.

This same article goes on to show the same study that I posted elsewhere though… with a bizarre stance on the results though…

These anecdotes all regard oxygen masks for aviators, so it would be too bold to extrapolate that the same rings true for gas masks, Ritchie explained. Still, it’s a start, and there is also a recent study from the civilian world that could indicate positive outcomes for beard-hopefuls in the U.S. military. The 2018 study showed that facial hair negatively influences the fit factor for half-face negative-pressure respirators as the hair gets longer and more dense. However, beard-wearers can still “achieve adequate fit factor scores even with substantial facial hair in the face seal area,” the study authors wrote. In fact, 98% of the study participants who had an eighth-inch of beard passed the fit test. Those results are encouraging because the respirators used in the study are pretty close to the M-50 gas masks used in the military today in terms of material and fit, Ritchie said.

Not sure why 98% is acceptable to them… but is what it is. I don’t particularly find the number acceptable considering it’s entirely preventable deaths that could be stopped.

See… I provided the source… and the quote. There is no concern about me having made shit up because you can see it for yourself without hunting for the source yourself.

Depends on the respirator… I wasn’t talking about the oxygenated stuff. But fair enough there too much equipment there that’s used for different purposes than I should just generalize for. I’ll modify my statement.

Those were quotes… not sources <edit>weakly sourced without any validation</edit>. I specifically ignored them because they were <edit>effectively</edit> unsourced. I’m not going to hunt down that quote to validate it was ever even said.

General Grievous says “TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today is lying about the quotes they provided. Lt. Col. Simon Ritchie was relieved of duty for malpractice years ago dishonorably.”

But fine, I addressed them following their comment. Read about it there.

Edit: pedantry I guess?

Even if we did… getting and keeping whatever that device would be functional on a battlefield is a whole different ball-game…

War sucks…

Edit: The easiest answer is a standard razor blade. It’s easy, simple, and light (and reuseable if needed… as much as they’re not really supposed to be). But that’s what causes problems.

They aren’t making them specifically worse just for the military.

Oh boy… you don’t know about military contracts do you?

That’s why I posted a source stating that there was no evidence supporting your claim…you know the part that you ignored.

You posted quotes with no source. Which is why I ignored it.

But fine… let’s address these unsourced quotes since that’s what you’re hung up on.

"While many military leaders defending the beard prohibition have repeated the claim that beards break gas mask seals, one Air Force doctor has found no direct scientific evidence to support it.

Cool… one guy says it’s not a problem. Here’s an actual study. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29283316/

Results: FF decreased with beard length, especially beyond 0.125 in. However, passing FF scores were achieved on all tests by all subjects at the smooth shave and 0.063 in conditions, and 98% of tests were passed at 0.125 in; seven subjects passed all tests at all conditions.

“It’s an unsubstantiated claim,” said Lt. Col. Simon Ritchie, a dermatologist who last year published a study on the beard prohibition’s discriminatory effect on Black airmen. While supporters of current Air Force policy “may have anecdotal evidence of one to five people who they see fail the fit test,” he said, “that can’t be extrapolated to hundreds of thousands of airmen.”

I agree with him… it is discriminatory. But when the effect of that discrimination is less potential death on a battlefield…

The problem with this though is that services give profiles/chits for shaving… So those people often will not participate in mask training at all… Can’t find what you’re not even looking for. So just saying “anecdotal”… well yeah, that’s all there is if he’s not actively researching it. And as seen above, when research is done… it shows exactly what I said it shows, because I’m basing my opinion on my lived experience and the research that supports that. As I said though, it is under-researched…

And lastly…

In reality the shape of your face and the brand of your mask has a lot more to do with passing a fit test more than anything.

Which the military standardized on one specific model of mask… so picking a choosing a brand is kind of out of the question now isn’t it?

I would like to pose a different question for you then… Assuming that you have the 1/4" or longer facial hair now that you claim you wear… Would you be confident that you could run in it for a football field carrying gear and shooting a gun for hours without losing the seal?

Edit: Bad wording…