Coronavirus and N95 Facemasks -- Will they help?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Lately, in various coronavirus threads here, some posters have been arguing that N95 facemasks won't help prevent the spread of the disease, because the masks are capable of filtering down to 0.3 microns, but the virus itself is supposedly smaller. However, it struck me that the virus isn't just floating around in the air by itself, but instead contained in larger particles of mucus / phlegm etc that people sneeze, cough, etc.... that N95 masks certainly are capable of stopping.

 

So what's the story with N95 facemasks and the coronavirus... Here's some of what I found when checking. And note, the comments below typically are comparing the value/effectiveness of simple paper drugstore-type masks first vs the higher level N95 facemasks second.  It certainly seems from the comments below that N95 masks can serve a purpose in this setting.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/01/24/coronavirus-spurs-run-face-masks-do-they-work/

 

Quote

The most commonly worn, cheap and disposable masks, known as the surgical masks, will limit — but not eliminate — the chance of inhaling large, infectious particles circulating near the face, said Marybeth Sexton, an assistant professor at Emory University School of Medicine. Even with perfect use, these masks aren’t foolproof because a virus or pathogen can still slip through the sides or enter the body through the eyes.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that any health-care workers interacting with coronavirus patients or suspected cases wear a stronger kind of mask, known as the N95 respirator, along with other gear such as gloves and eye protectors.

The N95 filters out 95 percent of pollutants and is “highly effective” in preventing the transmission of viruses, Sexton said. However, these masks must be specially fitted and therefore are not commonly worn outside of the health care setting.

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/01/25/799007842/coronavirus-faqs-do-masks-help-is-the-disease-really-so-mysterious

 

Quote

 

Stanley Perlman, a professor at the University of Iowa who studies coronaviruses, agrees that the [simple paper] mask won't necessarily prevent infection. But they do have some value, he says: Wearing a mask may stop an individual from directly touching their mouth and nose, which is a common way that viruses and germs enter the body. Masks provide some protection this way, he adds. "But what we teach is that they're not very good."

 

To protect themselves from infection, health care workers don't wear the kind of thin, over-the-mouth masks you see in operating rooms, which are designed to keep germs from leaving the mouths and noses of medical staff in the room. When it comes to preventing infection from their surroundings, health care workers wear N95 respirators, which fit much more tightly, says Schaffner. These respirators haven't been tested for effectiveness when worn by the general public, so there's no evidence to support a general recommendation, he says.

 

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/coronavirus-mask-what-to-buy_ca_5e2b0fcfc5b67d8874b0db77

 

Quote

 

Do paper face masks protect against coronavirus?

No, and in fact information from the Health Network calls the paper masks “counterproductive.” A common paper mask will do little to protect you from the virus, as it leaves parts of your eyes and mouth exposed, and doesn’t filter specific particles. It’s an OK strategy if you have a cold or flu and don’t want to cough on people, but that’s about it. 

Does an N95 mask work?

A properly fitted N95 mask will protect against the virus. The mask gets its name because it filters out 95 per cent of particles greater than 0.3 microns in size. Often used to protect against smoke and fumes, these are professional-grade masks that need to be fitted to the individual person and changed frequently. 

 

 

 

Edited January 27, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Assurancetourix]

7 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

but the virus itself is supposedly smaller.

It is smaller ;( which explains why these masks are useless against it )

see here : Post 13 by samuttodd :

 

" The new Coronavirus is approx 0.12 microns in size!

Any of the current filter masks N series (95,99,100) have the ability to block particles that are 0.3
microns and greater. The new Coronavirus is smaller then the minimum size these masks can
protect you from. "

 

post 13 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

It is smaller ;( which explains why these masks are useless against it )

see here : Post 13 by samuttodd :

 

" The new Coronavirus is approx 0.12 microns in size!

Any of the current filter masks N series (95,99,100) have the ability to block particles that are 0.3
microns and greater. The new Coronavirus is smaller then the minimum size these masks can
protect you from. "

 

post 13 

 

The part I think you're missing is what I alluded to in the opening of this thread, in that the virus isn't just floating around by itself. It's contained in larger particles of excretions. And if you read the news reports I posted above from reputable sources, they're disagreeing with you.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Of course, the other thing to be noted is regular N95 facemasks alone don't protect a person's eyes, where apparently airborne virus containing materials also can be absorbed... 

 

But until/unless I see something authoritative that advises to the contrary, for the time being I'm going to be wearing N95 masks when out in public / malls / public transport, etc etc... And carefully washing my hands with soap as recommended on a regular basis.

 

Plus, the air outside is bad again today in terms of PM2.5 air pollution, so that's another reason to be wearing a N95 mask these days, even if the coronavirus wasn't a concern.

 

 

[Beggar]

If I understand the information correctly we need something like this

 

 

[steven100]

new chinese protective virus suits available .....

[Assurancetourix]

20 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

And if you read the news reports I posted above from reputable sources, they're disagreeing with you.

 

I am only the messenger;
I am only reporting what another member has written;
he must be criticized ...
although it seems difficult to me because he seems to me to be a specialist in the matter and moreover he translates the chinese informations coming from China so that we can understand them ...

[KhunKenAP]

Try walking into a bar, restaurant or any place wearing this suitimage.png.237dfde1c9267d683fee99870deb1021.png.url. You would be run over by those heading for the exits.

[Assurancetourix]

16 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Plus, the air outside is bad again today in terms of PM2.5 air pollution, so that's another reason to be wearing a N95 mask these days, even if the coronavirus wasn't a concern.

 

Maybe we should stop with the overbidding in the do's and don'ts.
In your place, but I'm not there, fortunately, I would put myself a bullet in the head immediately ...
Our organism is gradually getting used to .. getting mithridized;
I am convinced that an inhabitant of the earth reborn from the 18 * century would be immediately poisoned if he came to the idea of eating what we eat in 2020 ...

 

In the middle of the 18th century, half of the children died before the age of 10 and life expectancy did not exceed 25 years.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

 

I am only the messenger;
I am only reporting what another member has written;
he must be criticized ...
although it seems difficult to me because he seems to me to be a specialist in the matter and moreover he translates the chinese informations coming from China so that we can understand them ...

 

The reason I created this thread was to encourage an educated, authoritative discussion on the subject. If you or others have pertinent info to share from research or legitimate medical authorities, that certainly would be welcome.  But that's a bit different from unsourced, unsubstantiated opinions.

 

[Assurancetourix]

4 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The reason I created this thread was to

There are already many (too many) posts on this subject;
and this one seems to me to be redundant with a few others;
we will have the same good and bad answers as on the others. 

[Jane Dough]

10 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The reason I created this thread was to encourage an educated, authoritative discussion on the subject. If you or others have pertinent info to share from research or legitimate medical authorities, that certainly would be welcome.  But that's a bit different from unsourced, unsubstantiated opinions.

 

I've got some "pertinent info" for you.

 

Hoping to "encourage an educated, authoritative discussion" on an internet forum is about as sensible as breaking into Wuhan for a family holiday.

 

Rooster

[CGW]

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

posted above from reputable sources, they're disagreeing with you.

Define "reputable sources" are they the ones that we choose to believe, or the ones we are told are "reputable"?

Google and facebook control most of the news in the present era, if it doesn't fit their criteria, they deem it to be "Fake"!

Difficult to find reputable sources these days, most have already been bought out, or are owned by those that have the most to gain!

You want an example? look no further than the left wing British Brainwashing Corporation.

Edited January 27, 2020 by CGW

[Beggar]

28 minutes ago, steven100 said:

new chinese protective virus suits available .....

There is a problem. If you order something from China now for how long do you need to put the products into quarantine before you can unpack them?

[Assurancetourix]

10 minutes ago, Beggar said:

There is a problem. If you order something from China

For me, there is no problem; I never buy anything on the internet so that the traders in my village and the nearby town continue to live properly.
I don't have and never had a smartphone;
The frame of my bike was made in Spain and the different parts are Japanese ...

[Assurancetourix]

46 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

But that's a bit different from unsourced, unsubstantiated opinions.

Does that type of source suit you?

 

But maybe what a Harvard epidemiologist writes is not enough credible? 

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/thermonuclear-pandemic-level-bad-harvard-epidemiologist-warns-viral-outbreak-might-get

[ThaiBrian]

For the next few weeks I'll be wearing a glove when out and about, and getting into the habit of using the back of my hand when touching my face. I'll carry sunglasses and a mask in my bag, just in case I find myself in a crowded environment. I'll be on a plane and a bus in the coming weeks, so I'll be wearing all 3 for about 2 hours.  

 

Edit: The N95 Mask and the sunglasses is to protect me from people coughing and accidentally sneezing in my direction. I'm also bringing alcohol wipes to wipe down my devices and the hotel room I'll be staying at. If you've seen the movie "Contagion", you'll remember the CDC employee contract the virus while staying at a hotel. 

Edited January 27, 2020 by ThaiBrian

[ivor bigun]

no masks in Pattaya all sold out it seems .

[Salerno]

13 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

Does that type of source suit you?

 

But maybe what a Harvard epidemiologist writes is not enough credible? 

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/thermonuclear-pandemic-level-bad-harvard-epidemiologist-warns-viral-outbreak-might-get

The OP is trying to get legit info out re effectiveness of masks; why are you trying to derail it? That link doesn't even mention masks.

[Assurancetourix]

1 minute ago, Salerno said:

The OP is trying to get legit info out re effectiveness of masks; why are you trying to derail it? That link doesn't even mention masks.

The answer has already been given by a member of this forum who is an epidemiologist:
these masks are totally useless

[JHolmesJr]

I wore a N95 the other day (I had two brand new ones left over from SARS days).

These things are mighty uncomfortable, expecially on the bridge of the nose where there is a metal 

clamp that moulds it to your face. I was also wearing full wrap around oakleys to protect the eyes.

Breathing in this mask feels laboured and when you exhale the outflow seems to go right into the 

sunglasses, fogging them up. I can imagine these discomforts being further aggravated in hot

weather outdoors with sweat and whatnot.

 

Ive opted to discard mask use and stick with stringent hand hygiene and avoiding touching any part of my face.

Also, no eating out.

[mike787]

Google it!  SImple answer yes, but not surgical masks, ONLY N95 design/grade.  

[highfive]

Recent studies have strengthened the evidence that respirators afford greater protection against respirable particles than medical masks. Studies comparing the filtering efficacy of medical masks and certified N95 respirators have found consistently high filtering capacity of N95 respirators and a wide range of filtering performance by medical masks (Qian et al., 1998; Oberg and Brosseau, 2008; Rengasamy et al., 2008, 2009). N95 respirators are tested as part of the NIOSH certification process to determine if they meet the criteria to filter out at least 95 percent of particles that are 0.3 μm in size (42 CFR Part 84). Studies by Lee and colleagues (2008) and Balazy and colleagues (2006) used aerosols of similar particle size range to bacteria and viruses (0.04–1.3 μm) and found that while some N95 respirators allowed slightly greater than 5 percent particle penetration, they had protection factors that were 8 to 12 times greater than those of medical masks. A recent study of nine types of medical masks by Oberg and Brosseau (2008) found wide variations in particle penetration (4 percent to 90 percent) through medical mask filters. The study also found that the majority of the medical masks failed the qualitative fit tests and all failed the quantitative fit tests. At the workshop, discussion focused on filtration principles that show that the aerodynamic behavior of an aerosol particle is based on its size, density, and shape (i.e., a 0.3 μm latex sphere behaves in a similar manner to a particle of the same size, density, and shape that may carry a virus).

 

Using particles less than 1 μm, a study of total leakage through medical masks worn by 25 subjects found that the contribution to total leakage into the medical mask was 5 percent to 8 percent from filter leakage and 25 to 38 percent from faceseal leakage (Grinshpun et al., 2009). In that study, N95 respirator contribution to total leakage was less than 1 percent from filter leakage and 3 to 5 percent from faceseal leakage.

 

Source: https://www.nap.edu/read/12748/chapter/2

 

-

 

The best thing to use is a mask with NIOSH N95 or FFP3 certification.

[Salerno]

12 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

The answer has already been given by a member of this forum who is an epidemiologist:
these masks are totally useless

Which is why they are still part of the protective equipment people are told to wear by the CDC and various other medical institutes I suppose.

[Assurancetourix]

12 minutes ago, Salerno said:

Which is why they are still part of the protective equipment people are told to wear by the CDC and various other medical institutes I suppose.

Quite simply to prevent people from panicking.
It's still easy to understand

[Emdog]

As virus is significantly smaller than the weave of the mask filter, I had this "vision thing": the mask is like a tennis court net and the virus is like shooting BBs at it. Some will hit the net by chance for sure, but most will go through. And so it goes

[CLW]

I've read from another sources that the virus is only spread by droplets not airborne. 

So I stand to that, surgical face masks give enough protection.

[richard_smith237]

14 minutes ago, Emdog said:

As virus is significantly smaller than the weave of the mask filter, I had this "vision thing": the mask is like a tennis court net and the virus is like shooting BBs at it. Some will hit the net by chance for sure, but most will go through. And so it goes

Not quite: while the flu virus is smaller than the weave of a mask, there are also other factors such as hand to mouth & eye exposure (via formites), and simple eye exposure to airborne viruses which places us all at risk, but masks themselves are effective. 

 

As I understand it the virus is not airborne on its own, in the air is is carried via aerosol, i.e. produced by speaking etc, while coughing and sneezing is a forceful expulsion of aerosol - as the aerosol is larger than the weave of the masks the mask are commonly effective although not a foolproof measure against infection. 

Edited January 27, 2020 by richard_smith237

[Guderian]

There are reports that it can also be contracted through the eyes, so you'd also need some effective form of goggles.

[Pedrogaz]

I'll take my chances with the virus....no masks, just avoiding needless crowds and shopping etc. I'll also not travel on any planes until the hysteria dies down. 

We have an annual hysteria around flu season when the new virus emerges in China from livestock kept in homes, I can remember SARS and others, none of which have matched any of the experts' forecast for infections or deaths. Call my cynical if you wish.

I recognize that once in a while Spanish flu might come along and kill millions.....but the last time that happened was 1919....100 years ago.