Pollution Masks: Effective Covid-19 Protection?

Face masks have become a common sight since the coronavirus pandemic, and are known to reduce the risk of airborne infectious disease transmission. However, their effectiveness against pollution is less clear. Experts are divided on how successful masks are at protecting against pollution, and there are many different types of masks available, from cloth masks to N95 respirators. So, are pollution masks effective against coronavirus?

Are pollution masks effective against coronavirus?

N95 masks are superior to cloth and surgical masks

The effectiveness of a mask depends on both its filtration efficiency and its fit. A properly fitting N95 mask should cover the nose, mouth, and chin without leaving any gaps, ensuring that all inhaled and exhaled air passes through the mask. This tight seal improves the overall protection offered by the mask. N95 masks combine mechanical and electrostatic filtration, using stationary electric charges in the mask's polypropylene microfibers to attract and capture submicron particles. This dual-filtration system further enhances the mask's ability to filter out small particles.

Studies have evaluated the protection offered by different types of masks. One study found that an NIOSH-approved N95 mask had a filtration efficiency of 98%, significantly higher than the 80% efficiency of a medical procedure mask and the 71.5% efficiency of a surgical mask. Another study by Colorado State University's John Kodros and colleagues measured the filtration efficiency of various masks, including cotton, synthetic fibre, surgical, and N95 respirators. The results confirmed the superiority of N95 respirators in filtering fine particles, with N95 masks offering the highest degree of protection across all particle sizes.

While N95 masks provide superior protection, they were initially intended for healthcare workers and became challenging to obtain during the pandemic. Cloth masks, on the other hand, are reusable, easily accessible, and recommended by organisations like the CDC for the general public, especially in areas with high rates of community transmission. However, it is important to note that cloth masks should follow specific guidelines, such as having at least three layers, with the World Health Organization (WHO) recommending an innermost layer of hydrophilic material, a middle layer of hydrophobic synthetic material, and an outermost layer of hydrophobic material to limit external contamination.

Face masks are effective against airborne infectious disease transmission

Face masks are one of the simplest, most accessible, and effective measures against the transmission of infectious respiratory diseases. They are particularly useful in mitigating the risk of airborne transmission.

The efficacy of face masks in preventing the spread of respiratory illnesses has been studied extensively, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the usefulness of masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19 is still under debate, studies have shown that they can effectively limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission. A 2008 study found that surgical masks were 68% effective in blocking SARS transmission, while N95 masks were more than 90% effective. N95 masks are superior to cloth and surgical masks in filtering fine particles, such as those found in wildfire smoke.

The protection factor of a mask describes the ratio of particles upstream and downstream of the mask, quantifying how effectively it reduces pollutant intake. The N95 mask offers the highest degree of protection across all particle sizes due to its combination of mechanical and electrostatic filtration. The electrostatic filtration uses stationary electric charges in the mask's polypropylene microfibers to attract and trap submicron particles.

The effectiveness of face masks in preventing disease transmission also depends on human behavior. Masks must be worn properly and consistently to ensure their effectiveness. Additionally, cloth masks should be cleaned or disposed of when they become moist to prevent viral contamination of surfaces.

In virus-rich indoor environments with high infection probabilities, more advanced masks, such as N95/FFP2, are required to prevent airborne transmission effectively. Combining masks with other protective measures, such as ventilation and social distancing, is crucial to maintaining a low infection probability.

Cloth masks offer better protection than bandanas

Face masks have been widely used during the coronavirus pandemic to mitigate the risk of airborne infectious disease transmission. While surgical masks and N95 respirators are superior in filtering fine particles, they are reserved for healthcare workers. For the general public, simple cloth-based face coverings are recommended.

The effectiveness of cloth masks can be attributed to their fabric composition. Surgical masks, for instance, are made of tightly woven fibers that are stuck together, making it impossible to see through them. In contrast, cloth masks have a looser weave, allowing light to pass through. This looser weave results in reduced filtration efficiency compared to surgical masks. However, cloth masks still offer considerably better protection than going out in public with a bare face or using a bandana.

The CDC recommends cloth-based face coverings for the general public, and they have provided tutorials on how to fold bandanas into face masks. By following these guidelines, individuals can create their own face masks at home, ensuring they have access to a protective barrier against coronavirus transmission.

While cloth masks offer better protection than bandanas, it is important to note that they may not be as effective against air pollution. Masks can help protect against the health risks associated with air pollution, but their effectiveness varies depending on the type of mask and the specific pollutants.

Surgical masks are better than cloth masks

Face masks have become an essential tool in the fight against the coronavirus pandemic. While getting vaccinated is the best protection against COVID-19, the type of mask you wear can add another layer of protection. Studies have shown that surgical masks offer better protection against COVID-19 than cloth masks. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends wearing face masks to limit the spread of COVID-19, but it does not specify which type of mask is best.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) describes a surgical mask as "a loose-fitting, disposable device that creates a physical barrier between the mouth and nose of the wearer and potential contaminants in the immediate environment." Surgical masks are cleared by the FDA, but they do not provide reliable protection from aerosolized particles and are not considered respiratory protective devices. On the other hand, cloth masks have a lower "filtration efficiency" than surgical masks. One study found that the filtration efficiency of surgical masks was about 95% compared to 37% for cloth masks. Another study found that the filtration efficiency of surgical masks ranged from 42-88%, while cloth masks ranged from only 16-23%.

Surgical masks are also better at limiting the transmission of droplets than cloth masks. This is because surgical masks combine mechanical and electrostatic filtration, allowing them to attract and trap submicron particles. N95 respirators, which are even more effective than surgical masks, are approved by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and meet higher standards for protection. Dr. Ashwin Balagopal, an infectious disease expert at Johns Hopkins Medicine, recommends N95 or KN95 masks over cloth masks for this reason.

While surgical masks offer better protection than cloth masks, it is important to note that the World Health Organization recommends surgical masks for certain high-risk groups, including people 60 and older and anyone with an underlying health condition. For those with access to them, N95 or KN95 masks may offer the highest level of protection against COVID-19.

Japanese Pitta masks are ineffective against small particles

Japanese Pitta masks have become increasingly popular in Chinese cities like Beijing and Shanghai, as well as in the US, India, and South Korea. They are sleek and stylish, but are they effective at filtering out particles?

The short answer is no. The Pitta mask is not effective at capturing small particles. This means it won't do a good job of filtering out PM2.5, viruses, bacteria, or fine particles. Research shows that 0.3-micron particles are the most difficult to capture. If a mask effectively captures particles of this size, it can also capture smaller particles. The Pitta mask captured 0% of 0.3-micron particles and only 64% of larger 2.5-micron particles. In comparison, a surgical mask captured more 2.5-micron particles, and 3M masks captured over 90% of particles.

The Pitta mask is made of polyurethane, the same material used to make sponges. It has no filter inside. The makers of Pitta masks claim that their product is 99% effective at filtering out pollen and dust particles, which range from 5-100 microns in size. While this may be true, it is ineffective at capturing smaller particles.

The coronavirus particle is approximately 0.125 microns in diameter. The smallest particles are 0.06 microns, and the largest are 0.14 microns. This makes COVID-19 particles smaller than PM2.5 particles but larger than some dust particles and gases. As the Pitta mask is ineffective at capturing particles smaller than 5 microns, it is not suitable for protection against coronavirus particles.

In conclusion, Japanese Pitta masks are ineffective against small particles. They are not suitable for protection against coronavirus particles and should not be relied upon for this purpose.

Frequently asked questions