Face Masks: Effective Shields Against Air Pollution?

Face masks have become a common sight in cities with high levels of air pollution, especially in Asia. With air pollution causing an estimated 4.2 million premature deaths worldwide each year, many people are turning to face masks for protection. However, new research suggests that these masks may not be as effective as they claim to be. While face masks can provide some protection against particulate matter, their effectiveness varies greatly depending on the material and fit. This raises the question: does wearing a face mask really protect against air pollution?

Effectiveness of face masks in protecting against air pollution

Face masks are designed to protect against "particulate matter" (PM), also known as particle pollution. PM2.5 particles, in particular, are very dangerous to humans as they are small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs and travel to the alveoli, impairing lung function. PM particles are solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air, some of which are visible to the naked eye, while others are so small that they can only be detected with a microscope. They are released from construction sites, fires, and chemical reactions involving pollutants from power plants, industries, and automobiles.

The effectiveness of face masks in protecting against air pollution has been called into question by recent studies. One study, conducted in Beijing, assessed the effectiveness of nine masks that claimed to protect against fine particle pollution. The results showed that the masks varied significantly in their ability to filter pollution particles, with average particle and carbon penetration ranging from 0.26% to 29%. The tests on volunteers revealed even greater differences, with average leakage ranging from 3% to 68% while performing sedentary tasks. Only one mask had an average leakage of less than 10% in both active and sedentary tests.

The California Department of Public Health states that only certain masks are effective in reducing exposure to air pollution, and simple paper dust masks or surgical masks are largely ineffective in filtering out harmful particles. The fit of the facial mask is also crucial, as an improper fit can allow harmful particles to be sucked directly into the mouth.

While face masks may provide some protection against air pollution, it is important to note that their effectiveness varies widely depending on the type and quality of the mask. It is recommended to choose masks that are marketed for workplace use and to ensure a proper fit to maximize protection.

The impact of air pollution on health

Air pollution is a well-known environmental health hazard. It is defined as the presence of one or more contaminants in the atmosphere, such as dust, fumes, gas, mist, odour, smoke, or vapour, in quantities that can be harmful to human health. The main pathway of exposure is through the respiratory tract, but due to their small size, some pollutants can enter the bloodstream through the lungs and circulate throughout the body, impacting almost every organ.

The health effects of air pollution depend on the types and concentrations of pollutants in the mixture. Particulate matter (PM), especially fine particulate matter (PM2.5), is a critical pollutant that leads to negative health impacts. These tiny particles can be inhaled into the lungs, causing inflammation, oxidative stress, immunosuppression, and mutagenicity in cells throughout the body. Short-term exposure to high levels of PM can lead to reduced lung function, respiratory infections, and aggravated asthma, while long-term exposure increases the risk of chronic diseases such as stroke, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cancer. Other important air pollutants with adverse health effects include carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and sulphur dioxide (SO2).

Ozone, for example, is a powerful lung irritant that can cause inflammation and damage to multiple body systems, leading to respiratory problems such as chest tightness, coughing, and shortness of breath. Even short-term exposure to high levels of outdoor air pollution has been associated with reduced lung function, asthma, cardiac issues, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions.

Certain populations are more susceptible to the health impacts of air pollution. These include children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with pre-existing chronic conditions, particularly heart and lung diseases. Additionally, psychosocial stress factors such as poverty, racial/ethnic discrimination, and residency status can amplify the harmful effects of air pollution.

While face masks designed to filter out pollution particles have become a common sight in polluted cities, particularly in Asia, research suggests that their effectiveness may vary significantly. A study in Beijing tested nine masks that claimed to protect against fine particle pollution, and found that the average particle and carbon penetration ranged from 0.26% to 29%. Tests on human volunteers revealed even greater differences, with average leakage ranging from 3% to 68% while performing sedentary tasks.

The design of face masks for protection against particulate matter

Face masks have become increasingly important in recent years, especially with the onset of the global health crisis. While face masks are commonly used in polluted cities, new research suggests that masks designed to filter out pollution particles may not be as effective as they claim to be.

A study conducted by an international team of researchers from Heriot-Watt and the Institute of Occupational Medicine in the UK assessed the effectiveness of a selection of masks in Beijing. The team tested nine masks, all of which claimed to protect against fine particle pollution (PM2.5). The masks were tested by drawing airborne diesel exhaust through the mask material and measuring the levels of particulate matter and black carbon. The results showed that the masks' effectiveness varied significantly, ranging from 0.26% to 29% penetration, depending on the flow rate and mask material.

The same masks were then tested on volunteers who performed everyday tasks such as talking, sitting, and walking. The tests on volunteers revealed an even greater difference, with the average leakage from the masks ranging from as low as 3% to as high as 68% while performing sedentary tasks. This variation in effectiveness was attributed mainly to the poor facial fit of the masks.

When choosing a face mask for protection against particulate matter, it is essential to consider the mask's design and fit. Look for masks with adjustable features to ensure a snug fit and minimise gaps between your face and the mask edges. Masks with disposable filters, such as the PM2.5 filters, offer enhanced protection against particulate matter and are designed to be comfortable and breathable. It is also important to maintain your mask properly, including washing cloth masks frequently and ensuring they are completely dry before reuse.

While face masks can provide some level of protection against particulate matter, it is important to note that they do not protect against chemicals, gases, and vapours. Additionally, masks should be used only once unless they come with disposable filters, as reusing masks can increase the risk of infections due to the trapping of humidity and heat.

The performance of retail masks versus certified standards

While retail masks must adhere to local or international standards, their real-life performance may not always match the exposure reduction potential that is marketed. For instance, a study that assessed the effectiveness of nine masks purchased in Beijing found that none of them were certified to the Chinese guidelines for 'daily protective masks'. Six of the nine masks were reportedly certified to GB2626-2006 or an international equivalent, but one of these masks (Yi Jie) performed poorly in the volunteer trial.

In another study, researchers tested the effectiveness of each mask by drawing airborne diesel exhaust through a section of the mask's material for 30 minutes and measuring the levels of particulate matter and black carbon on both sides. The masks were then tested on 10 volunteers who were exposed to diesel exhaust in a lab while performing everyday tasks such as talking, sitting, bending over, and walking. The results showed that the masks varied significantly in their effectiveness, with the team finding that depending on the material used for the mask, the average particle and carbon penetration ranged from 0.26% to 29%. The tests on the volunteers revealed an even greater difference, with the team finding that the average leakage from the masks ranged from as low as 3% to as high as 68% while the participants performed sedentary tasks such as sitting.

The results of these studies suggest that the face masks currently found on the market may not provide adequate protection against air pollution. However, it is important to note that the effectiveness of a mask can depend on various factors such as the material used, the fit, and the activity being performed by the wearer. For example, a study of respiratory protection against volcanic ash found that industry-certified N95 or N99 equivalent masks performed better in volunteer tests compared to masks made from other materials with similar filtering abilities. Similarly, copper oxide-containing masks have been found to pass Bacterial Filtration Efficacy, Differential Pressure, Latex Particle Challenge, and Resistance to Penetration by Synthetic Blood tests, indicating that they have potent anti-influenza biocidal properties without altering their physical barrier properties.

The importance of face mask fit

Face masks have become a common sight in highly polluted cities, especially in Asia. However, research suggests that masks designed to filter out pollution particles may not be as effective as they claim to be.

The importance of a well-fitting face mask cannot be overstated. A properly fitting face mask is essential to ensure maximum protection against air pollution. Gaps between the mask and the face can significantly reduce the effectiveness of the mask, allowing particles to enter and exit through the gaps. This is true for both cloth and surgical masks. A snug fit ensures that the mask seals to the face properly, providing a higher level of protection.

The N95 mask, for example, is designed to fit tightly to the face, providing better protection than looser-fitting masks. However, the elastic bands on N95 masks can wear out over time, resulting in a looser fit. It is recommended to discard N95 masks when the straps are stretched out and no longer fit snugly. Similarly, KF94 and KN95 masks are effective and provide a tighter fit than cloth or surgical masks.

The fit of a face mask is so important that the CDC has created an infographic of approved facial hair styles that work with masks. For example, soul patch, villain, and walrus facial hair styles allow for a proper mask fit, while mutton chops and chin curtain styles do not.

In addition to the fit, the material and construction of the mask also play a crucial role in its effectiveness. The number of layers and the specific materials used in cloth masks can impact their efficacy. Surgical-style masks, while not as effective as N95, KF94, or KN95 masks, can still offer adequate protection in less risky settings if they have a tight fit.

While there is conflicting evidence regarding the effectiveness of face masks in protecting against air pollution, choosing a well-fitting mask made from suitable materials can help maximize its protective capabilities.

Frequently asked questions