• expired

Disposable Face Masks 3ply 2x 50pk (Twin Pack Only) $19.99 + Delivery ($0 to Metro with $55 Spend) @ Winc

11

Disposable Face Mask 3-ply Non-sterile Class 1 Level 3
2 x Box 50 Value Twin Pack (Total 100 x Masks) Only $19.99 inc GST (~$9.98 per box 50)
Free delivery to metro when you spend over $55
Get a further $20 off your first order (over $150) when you FIRST sign up using this link: https://www.winc.com.au/main-my-register. (Post registration you must sign in to redeem your first order coupon at checkout).

Designed for optimum safety and comfort, these disposable non-sterile face masks are perfect for everyday use. Three purpose-built layers combine for a minimum Bacterial Filtration Efficiency (BFE) rating of 98%. These disposable masks are rated as Class 1, Level 3.

This value pack contains:

  • Convenient twin pack comes with 2 x boxes of 50 masks (total 100 masks)
  • Bacterial Filtration Efficiency of 98% (up to 99%)
  • Non-sterile
  • Class 1, Level 3
  • Curved shape for lasting comfort
  • Equipped with nose bridge strip for a snug fit

Hurry, while stocks last. Offer ends 31 August 2021.

Related Stores

Winc (previously Staples)
Winc (previously Staples)

closed Comments

  • +2

    I know these are everywhere just now, and that is the problem. They are a huge environmental issue.
    I would recommend using non-disposable if that is possible.

  • and the first link is for disposable masks!!

    • Yes, but that is the google algorithms for you. As I said, a very quick search.

  • $20 First Order Discount not working?

    • Have you signed up and then logged into the site?

      • To get a further $20 off your first order when you first sign up using this link: https://www.winc.com.au/main-my-register. (Post registration you must sign in to redeem your first order coupon at checkout).**

        • +4

          …. Order minimum amount of $150 has not been met. !!!

  • +5

    Nothing special about this price

    100 for $17.99 delivered. 3 ply, local stock and free shipping with no stupid minimum spend restrictions.

    • +2

      Pretty sure they can reduce viral load, which is why doctors wear masks. But I guess you're smarter than doctors

            • +1

              @Deeseeee: Haven't asked him. Might have something to do with believing fake news that it's fake though. Can't fix stupid

        • +2

          you were suggesting they [masks] stop viruses until I proved how that's physically impossible and ridiculous.

          You are not just pig ignorant and a purveyor of bovine excrement wrt covid-19 matters, you're also extremely loose with the truth. I wonder why I'm not shocked? Nevertheless, feel free to quote anywhere that I've said or suggested that.

          As we've seen previously, the vast majority of your claims are irrational, unfounded, arrant (and dangerous) nonsense. The link - which we've seen before - shows you either have significantly impaired comprehension capability, that you simply couldn't be bothered reading the detail which explains basis for the CDC decision, or that your honorary D-K award was fully deserved.

          This might help: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01296612.2017.1...

          • @DisabledUser67242:

            You are not just pig ignorant and a purveyor of bovine excrement wrt covid-19 matters, you're also extremely loose with the truth.

            Lol guilt always warrants reaction and you seem to be getting pretty worked up! Anyone who reads that previous thread could tell at the very least that you were insinuating wearing a mask could stop covid, which isn't surprising considering your clearly skewed views on the matter and disregard for blatant irrefutable evidence

            As we've seen previously, the vast majority of your claims are irrational, unfounded, arrant (and dangerous) nonsense

            Lol literally from the article "In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses". Is it a coincidence you were quick to share that link, instead of anything of substance to back up your claims, like you have it saved because it relates to yourself. Although cognitive dissonance would be a better way to describe your behaviour

            • @Deeseeee: Can't find evidence to support your lie? How much more time do you need? A day/week/month?

              The article you linked doesn't say what you think it does, as was previously pointed out. Here's what it does mean:
              "The alert advises labs to switch to other COVID-19 testing methods and “encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.” The reason being, “Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season.”

              CDC spokesperson Jasmine Reed told Reuters via email, “the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019 nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel met an important unmet need when it was developed and deployed and has not demonstrated any performance issues.” Reed continued, “the demand for this test has declined with the emergence of other higher-throughput and multiplexed assays.”

              “CDC is encouraging public health laboratories to adopt the CDC Influenza SARS-CoV-2 (Flu SC2) Multiplex Assay to enable continued surveillance for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2, which will save both time and resources,” Reed added.

              Simple enough to comprehend, even for an amateur. Here's the full fact check of your misreading of the CDC Lab Alert, which was entirely understandable and predictable given your obvious lack of expertise on the topic: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid19-pcr-test-i...

              • @DisabledUser67242: Lmao you are hilarious in the ways you try and save yourself, linking the same article and making the parts you think help you bold doesn't make you right. The first part of the article wich you left "un bold lol" says the test can't distinguish between covid and the Flu hence why they're abolishing it. The attempt to save face by the cdc spokesman by saying they overestimated doesn't make sense as the above part of the article (the part where studies have been done, not the part where it's quoted the opinion of a cdc spokesperson) says it can't distinguish between covid and the flu

                Can't find evidence to support your lie? How much more time do you need? A day/week/month?

                Lol what? I have provided all of the irrefutable evidence, you have re linked the article I linked and made the unimportant part of the article bold, as if this is somehow supposed to prove anything lol. I was almost going to say you remind me of those delusional fact check websites that are funded by the companies or associates of the subjects in question, but then you go and actually link one lol. I think it's pretty obvious what your intentions are now my friend, you're glowing very brightly

                • +1

                  @Deeseeee: Doesn't say that at all of course. The CDC spokesperson couldn't have been any clearer in addressing the social media posts you rely on for your information, although she probably didn't expect to be addressing people with primary school comprehension and zero experience and expertise in testing.

                  The evidence I was referring to was in regard to this barefaced lie: you were suggesting they [masks] stop viruses…... Forgotten already?

                  The deal you were (rightly) removed from is still up so that "suggestion" should be a cinch to find - unless of course it doesn't exist. So once again, how long do you need to locate my supposed statement that masks 'stop' viruses?

                  • @DisabledUser67242:

                    Doesn't say that at all of course. The CDC spokesperson couldn't have been any clearer in addressing the social media posts you rely on for your information

                    Lol again yes it clearly does say that and it's not a "social media" post as you claim, it was taken from the article I linked in the first place

                    "In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses"

                    Its like you bank on people only reading your comments and nothing else lol

                    • @Deeseeee: Your assumption of what the notice said and why it was released to practitioners - obviously acquired from equally ignorant people - is wrong, plain and simple.

                      Did you miss what the CDC spokesperson said, or did you simply ignore it because it exposed your lack of comprehension about how tests are developed, improved, simplified and often replaced with cheaper or more efficient ones? She could hardly have made it easier for you:
                      “the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019 nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel met an important unmet need when it was developed and deployed and has not demonstrated any performance issues.” Reed continued, “the demand for this test has declined with the emergence of other higher-throughput and multiplexed assays.”

                      Any timeframe for you providing those claims you attributed to me or are you conceding no such statements were never made? Rhetorical question.

                      • +1

                        @DisabledUser67242: Mate… you’re wasting your time. You’re entirely correct, but you’re trying to have a debate with an immovable object. Just accept that the guy is a loon and move on.

  • how effective is a mask not rated N95 for COVID?

    • No mask or respirator can stop any virus not just covid, they both say this on their product packaging

      • Noone here is claiming masks will 100% prevent transmission. It is irrefutable that they will however decrease transmission - how could they possibly not? Something is better than nothing. Even if it prevents 1 death I am happy to do my part.

        Why are you continuing this one person anti-mask crusade? What is your obsession with repeating yourself over and over again?

        Just move on.

        • It is irrefutable that they will however decrease transmission - how could it possibly not?

          You're assuming covid isn't the flu see
          EUA for PCR testing is being withdrawn by the CDC because the PCR test can't differentiate between SARS and the Flu. Direct link to the CDC website. (Covid is the flu, and if they can't even test for it how can they test or distinguish a "new strain")
          https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert...

          You're also assuming a virus with animal reservoirs like the flu (influenza, covid etc) can be stopped. There are yearly flu seasons and flu shots because you can't get rid of it, no matter how many masks you wear or how many vaccines you take, it won't make a difference

          Why are you continuing this one person anti-mask crusade? What is your obsession with repeating yourself over and over again? Just move on. Christ.

          wait if masks and vaccines don't work and covid like the flu can't be eradicated
          it's not about safety or health
          rich have gotten richer poorer have gotten poorer
          maybe it's about more than just "wearing a mask"

          • @Deeseeee:

            you're assuming covid isn't the flu see

            Actually, unlike you, see, we're taking the collective word of thousands of experts who have - again, unlike you - the qualifications, experience, and hard-earned reputations to be able to provide credible advice that covid-19 (a corona virus) is different from influenza, see.

            no matter how many masks you wear or how many vaccines you take, it won't make a difference

            And yet all the credible evidence - something you struggle to understand and come to grips with, let alone provide - says otherwise. Why is that? Ego? Ignorance? D-K effect? Ideology? Rejection of knowledge, learning and expertise? Probably all of those.

            Viruses are tricky things as you know (cough). They have a habit of mutating to protect themselves from things which would wipe them out. Hence we need altered flu shots every year and the apparent reduced effectiveness of current Covid-19 vaccines against Delta.

            What I particularly love about egoistical skeptics/rejectors of knowledge is that they have a propensity for accepting - and using - science where they think it suits their beliefs but completely rejecting any science which shows the inanity of those beliefs. They also put their own "knowledge" and understanding on a par with experts, and often far above it. The false equivalence is breathtaking in both its arrogance and its ignorance.

            • @DisabledUser67242:

              What I particularly love about egoistical skeptics/rejectors of knowledge is that they have a propensity for accepting - and using - science where they think it suits their beliefs but completely rejecting any science which shows the inanity of those beliefs

              LOL it must be hard for you as every comment you make just makes you appear more and more insane and guilty of what you're accusing me of, you haven't provided anything, you just keep commenting that everyone's delusional without realising that it's you who appears delusional lol. The only thing you've done is take one part from a article I posted and make the text bold lol

              And yet all the credible evidence - something you struggle to understand and come to grips with, let alone provide - says otherwise. Why is that? Ego? Ignorance? D-K effect? Ideology?

              Lol really now you're denying that there is a virus called the flu that we have every year? Or that there's yearly flu shots to compensate for it? Or that virus's like the flu have animal reservoirs and CANT be eradicated hence there prominent and yearly existence? Lol. And you think you're smarter than a doctor or an immunologist but don't even know that there's the flu that we can't get rid of? Hmm it would appear that you're the one spouting nonsense, disregarding basic knowledge taught to doctors and basing it all of nothing. Do you know what cognitive dissonance is? You should google it then make a few phone calls

              • @Deeseeee:

                Lol really now you're denying that there is a virus called the flu that we have every year? Or that there's yearly flu shots to compensate for it?

                One word answer - NO. Only an ignorant, egoistical fool driven by ideology and the naivety of false equivalence would suggest such a thing, because as you know - presumably based on common knowledge acquired from the experts you reject when it suits - that would be both false AND patently stupid. Still looking for evidence of your lie? I don't suppose you understand what an apology is?

                • @DisabledUser67242: Lol what, the absolute (profanity) are you even talking about? Stop replying to me, there's enough back and forths now for anyone to see that you're wrong and base your reality of the MSM and emotion not factual evidence or reality. Good luck to you honestly you need it

                  • @Deeseeee:

                    Lol what, the absolute (profanity) are you even talking about?

                    You know very well what I'm talking about. The lie I've challenged you to provide evidence for at least twice already on this deal. You know, where I supposedly said masks stop covid-19. That lie. Sound familiar? There's plenty of support out there if you're struggling, I suggest you make use of it and stop pedaling bs on topics you know nothing about.

                    • @DisabledUser67242: Lmao oy vey! At least you can admit now that masks are useless, well done

                      • @Deeseeee:

                        At least you can admit now that masks are useless,

                        I could, but I prefer to live in a rational adult world where self-inflicted ignorance isn't a celebrated trait. Care to join us? Membership is free.

    • +1

      Even basic masks can help reduce community transmission of covid-19 if that's what you're asking. How much reduction depends on many things, including mask quality, correct mask usage and the behaviour of individuals. They essentially provide some limited protection from pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers (people with symptoms or who have covid-19 shouldn't be out in the community) . They also provide a barrier between aerosol particles and the wearer. Higher spec masks used properly generally provide better protection, as you would expect. Google will turn up plenty of credible anecdotal advice, and controlled clinical tests regarding masks and aerosol transmission.

Login or Join to leave a comment