Anti-Pollution Masks: Effective Against Coronavirus?

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about a massive global economic and health calamity, causing unprecedented social and economic disruption. In the context of the pandemic, there has been much debate about the efficacy of personal protective equipment (PPE) in protecting the public against the virus. This discussion has also brought to light the issue of pollution caused by single-use protective equipment, such as masks and gloves, which are overwhelming landfills and flooding oceans with waste. In this context, it is worth exploring whether anti-pollution masks can be used for protection against the coronavirus.

Cloth face masks are recommended by public health agencies for disease source control

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that cloth face masks should be worn in public where social distancing is not possible to help stop the spread of coronavirus. The US Center for Disease Control, along with Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, The Mayo Clinic, and Cleveland Clinic all concur with this recommendation. The WHO also recommends that those aged over 60 years old or with underlying health risks require more protection and should wear medical masks in areas where there is community transmission.

The WHO recommends using masks with at least three layers of different materials. Two spunbond polypropylene layers are also believed to offer adequate filtration and breathability. When producing cloth face masks, two parameters should be considered: filtration efficiency of the material and breathability. The filter quality factor known as "Q" is commonly used as an integrated filter quality indicator. It is a function of filtration efficiency and breathability, with higher values indicating better performance. Experts recommend a Q-factor of three or higher.

A peer-reviewed summary of the filtration properties of cloth and cloth masks concluded that, pending further research, evidence is strongest for 2 to 4 layers of plain weave cotton or flannel, at least 100 thread count.

Cloth face masks are not considered personal protective equipment

OSHA encourages workers to wear face coverings when in close contact with others to reduce the risk of spreading the coronavirus. However, it is important to note that cloth face masks are not a substitute for N95 respirators or other Filtering Facepiece Respirators (FFRs), which provide respiratory protection to the wearer, or for surgical masks, which provide fluid barrier protection.

N95 respirators and surgical masks are examples of PPE that are used to protect the wearer from particles or from liquid contaminating the face. N95 respirators are uncomfortable and cannot be worn for more than a few hours at a time. They are also not designed for children or people with facial hair, as a proper fit cannot be achieved in these cases.

Surgical masks, on the other hand, are loose-fitting, disposable devices that create a physical barrier between the mouth and nose of the wearer and potential contaminants. They are often used in healthcare settings and may come with or without a face shield. While they can block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatters, they do not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs or sneezes.

In summary, cloth face masks are not considered PPE because they do not meet the same standards of protection as N95 respirators or surgical masks. They may still be recommended or required in certain settings, but they should not be relied upon as a primary means of protection against the coronavirus or other respiratory illnesses.

The World Health Organization recommends using masks with at least three layers of different materials

The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued recommendations regarding the use of face masks to curb the spread of COVID-19. According to the WHO, the general public should wear fabric masks in areas with widespread transmission of the virus and where physical distancing is challenging to maintain. This includes places like public transportation, shops, and other confined or crowded spaces. The WHO advises that masks should be worn in public settings, especially when social distancing is not feasible.

The WHO has provided specific guidelines on the composition of these fabric masks, recommending that they consist of at least three layers of different materials. Two spunbond polypropylene layers are also considered adequate in terms of filtration and breathability. The Q-factor, which is a measure of integrated filter quality, should be three or higher, indicating a balance between filtration efficiency and breathability.

When creating cloth face masks, it is essential to consider two crucial parameters: the filtration efficiency of the material and breathability. The WHO's guidance on the use of masks by the general public has evolved as new evidence has emerged about the effectiveness of masks in curbing the spread of COVID-19.

The WHO emphasizes that masks alone are not a substitute for other essential public health measures, such as physical distancing and proper hand hygiene. A comprehensive approach that includes multiple prevention techniques is necessary to effectively reduce the risk of transmission.

N95 respirators are uncomfortable and cannot be worn for more than a few hours at a time

N95 respirators are widely recognised as uncomfortable and unable to be worn for more than a few hours at a time. This is due to their design, which makes breathing more difficult. The N95 respirator's close facial fit and efficient filtration of airborne particles mean that the wearer must exert more effort when inhaling and exhaling. This increased breathing resistance can be particularly risky for children, whose lungs are still developing, and for people with impaired lung function, such as those with asthma or emphysema. For this reason, it is recommended that people with chronic respiratory or cardiac conditions consult a healthcare provider before using an N95 respirator.

The N95 respirator's tight seal around the nose and mouth, which is crucial for ensuring the respirator's effectiveness, can also cause discomfort for the wearer. The pressure of the respirator's edges against the skin may become painful over time, and the warm, moist environment created within the mask can lead to a buildup of sweat and fogging of glasses. Additionally, the elastic straps of the N95 respirator may be too tight for individuals with larger head sizes, causing discomfort during extended wear.

The discomfort associated with N95 respirators can lead to a reduced adherence to their use, potentially compromising their effectiveness in protecting against the coronavirus. It is important to prioritise comfort when selecting a respirator, especially for long-term wear, to ensure that the wearer is able to maintain a proper seal and minimise air leakage. Alternative options, such as surgical masks or cloth masks, may be more suitable for individuals who find N95 respirators uncomfortable. These masks provide a looser fit and allow for easier breathing, reducing the discomfort and fatigue associated with N95 respirators.

Furthermore, the supply chain issues and high costs associated with N95 respirators make them impractical for extended use by the general public. The demand for N95 respirators during the coronavirus pandemic has often outstripped the supply, and their cost may be prohibitive for individuals who require long-term protection. In such cases, reusable respirators or alternative types of masks may be more feasible options. It is important to prioritise comfort, fit, and ease of breathing when selecting a respiratory protection device to ensure adherence to its proper use and maximise its effectiveness in preventing the spread of the coronavirus.

Disposable masks may accumulate and release harmful chemical and biological substances

The enormous production of disposable masks is similar in scale to plastic bottles, which are estimated to be produced at a rate of 43 billion per month. However, unlike plastic bottles, there is no official guidance on mask recycling, making it more likely that they are disposed of as solid waste. As a result, disposable masks can end up in the environment, freshwater systems, and oceans, where they break down into micro-sized particles (smaller than 5mm) within a matter of weeks, and further fragment into nanoplastics (smaller than 1 micrometer).

The use of a new generation of masks, known as nanomasks, directly contributes to nanoplastic pollution by using nano-sized plastic fibers. When these masks break down in the environment, they may release more micro-sized plastics, faster than bulk plastics like plastic bags.

While there is a lack of data on the true impact of masks on the environment, researchers suspect that the widespread use of disposable masks is causing harmful biological and chemical substances to spread, posing health hazards to animals, humans, and the ecosystem.

Frequently asked questions