The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
Coronavirus: How Well Do Face Masks Protect Against Viruses, Droplets and Dust?
By Fabian Schmidt
The simple mouth and nose protector — a mask made of a rather thin paper fleece, which is knotted behind the head with ribbons - was formerly used almost exclusively in operating theaters.
Doctors and assistants wear this mouthguard primarily to prevent their patients on the operating table from being infected with germs and pathogens. If the wearer of the mask coughs or sneezes, for example, most of the droplets from the mouth and throat get caught in the mask.
In the long run, however, this only works if the mask is changed regularly and disposed of hygienically and safely. In surgery, doctors must change their mask at least every two hours. If, on the other hand, a mask of this type is worn repeatedly, it quickly loses its effectiveness.
How Much Protection Does the Mask Provide?
The wearer of the mask can protect himself against droplet and smear infections, but only to a very limited extent. Although the virus usually enters the body through the mouth or eyes — if there are no open wounds — the hands play the most important role in transporting the virus.
If you decide to wear a mask, you should probably also opt for protective goggles. The surgical masks, albeit less effective in keeping the viruses out, merely function as a constant reminder not to touch your nose with your hands when it itches. Neither should you rub your eyes.
Half Masks Offer Better Protection
In addition to surgical masks, which look more like multi-layer disposable kitchen towels, there are also half masks with a real filter effect. These are more familiar to those who work in dusty environments or with aerosols. They are available either as disposable masks, usually made of strong pressed cellulose with a filter element and an exhalation valve, or as plastic masks in which a suitable filter is then inserted.
In the European Union these types of masks are divided into three FFP protection classes (filtering face piece). Although masks of protection level FFP1 are still better than surgical masks, they do not offer the desired protection against viruses. They are intended for carpenters, for example, who work at a band saw with a vacuum extraction system. Workmen may wear them to catch the coarser dust, which the vacuum cleaner is unable to catch. Or a bricklayer can put them on before mixing cement with a trowel, kicking up some dust.
Only FFP-3 class masks effectively protect the wearer from droplet aerosols, protein molecules, viruses, bacteria, fungi and spores, and even from highly dangerous dusts such as asbestos fibers.
If a Mask is Needed — Then it Needs to Be the Right One
Such high-quality filter masks can protect the wearer — unlike simple surgical masks — from infection due to their design. In other words, also from a highly infectious pathogen such as measles or tuberculosis.
But here too, protection only works if many other protective measures are taken at the same time: Strict hygiene when putting on a mask, protective goggles, gloves and plastic apron or overall, proper disposal of possibly contaminated disposable items and regular hand washing. In addition, the surroundings must always be systematically disinfected.
These masks - together with all other protective clothing — are therefore used in quarantine stations, for example, where patients who are already infected are cared for. The medical staff has to put on and take off all the protective clothing, including the protective mask, at considerable expense.
For traveling in public transport or working at a keyboard at alternating workstations, which happen to be among the worst germinators of all, this effort would be completely disproportionate.
And What About Tear Gas?
The demonstrators in Hong Kong also wore a variety of different protective masks - from simple surgical masks to half masks with filters.
Surgical masks are probably only effective in concealing the demonstrators' identity. However, when the police fire tear gas grenades that spray an aerosol, only FFP-3 filters can provide some protection. To prevent the tear gas from getting into the eyes, airtight protective goggles are absolutely necessary.
However, occupational safety filters from the hardware store do not offer any real protection. A proper full face gas mask with a military NBC filter would do the job.
And of course this also provides good protection against viruses. But in everyday life nobody wants to walk around like this.
Best Protection: Don't forget to Wash Your Hands
All masks and goggles are of little use if the most important hygienic principles are neglected. For example, if you come home after a long bus or train ride, where you touched handrails and handles, take off the mask and scratch your nose, You could have left out the protective mask just as well.
It's the same at work: if you have been typing on the computer keyboard all morning and then go to lunch without washing your hands first, you take a considerable risk. Then, wearing a mask at the computer workstation would have been of little use either.
Reposted with permission from Deutsche Welle.
- Coronavirus Jitters Rattle Businesses, Industries, Organizations ... ›
- The Dangers of Using Tear Gas During a Viral Pandemic - EcoWatch ›
- 12 Things You Can Do To Help Stop COVID-19 (in Addition To Staying Home for Thanksgiving) - EcoWatch ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
The night sky has a special treat in store for stargazers this winter solstice.
- NASA Satellites Enable Scientists to Observe Climate Change ... ›
- Why Scientists Are Searching for Life in 'Alien Oceans' - EcoWatch ›
- To Save Endangered Species, Scientists Point Stargazing Software ... ›
By Dena Jones
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was sued three times this past summer for shirking its responsibility to protect birds from egregious welfare violations and safeguard workers at slaughterhouses from injuries and the spread of the coronavirus.
By Julia Conley
Conservation campaigners on Thursday accused President Donald Trump of taking a "wrecking ball" to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as the White House announced plans to move ahead with the sale of drilling leases in the 19 million-acre coastal preserve, despite widespread, bipartisan opposition to oil and gas extraction there.
The Sheenjek River in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Alexis Bonogofsky / USFWS
- Bipartisan Bill Seeks to Ban Drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge ›
- Bank of America Promises It Won't Fund Arctic Drilling - EcoWatch ›
- Trump's Drilling Leases on Public Lands Could Lead to 4.7B Metric ... ›
- Trump Administration's Alaska Oil and Gas Lease Sale a 'Major Flop ... ›
- Will Oil Companies Drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge ... ›
Hot, dry and windy conditions fueled a wildfire southeast of Los Angeles Thursday that injured two firefighters and forced 25,000 to flee their homes.
- 'Explosive' Southern California Lake Fire Spreads to 10,000 Acres ... ›
- A Gender-Reveal Party Started a Wildfire That Burned Nearly ... ›
- Wildfire in LA Burns 7,000 Acres During Record-Setting Heat Wave ... ›
The climate crisis already has a death toll, and it will get worse if we don't act to reduce emissions.
- 'Every Child Born Today Will Be Profoundly Affected by Climate ... ›
- Coronavirus Response Proves the World Can Act on Climate Change ›
- 5 Things About Climate Change and Coronavirus From WHO ... ›