The best study (an RCT) I’ve seen claims that cloth masks made no statistical difference in case reduction, whereas surgical masks reduced risk by 11% and 35% for people over 60. The study authors speculate that if more people wore masks (less than 50% did), this risk reduction would probably increase. The study was done in Bangladesh from November to January, and I suspect that the variants in circulation at that time were a lot closer to the less contagious original strain. If that’s the case, it would be less likely that more mask wearing would increase risk reduction as the authors claim.
Effective PPE could have stopped the surge, whereas masks didn’t. Therefore, masks offer poor protection. Studies likes these only quantify how poor that protection actually is.
Recommendations should be based on the best approaches available rather than on trying to guess the personal preferences of most people. I’m sure that the “embarrassing, uncomfortable, and inconvenient” argument was leveled against masks at the start of the pandemic but most people don’t complain about them too much today. The same mistake was repeated during the winter surge for disposable N95s. However, there were some exceptions like Germany and California which started recommending N95-equivalent PPE. I find N95s too uncomfortable to wear, but I feel a lot better wearing elastomerics. Should my subjective personal preferences form the basis of general recommendations? No, and I don’t see why your preferences or speculations about the preferences of others should either.
Thanks for that reply. I’m realizing that part of the disagreement here is that I was vague and used “mask” to refer to n95s as well. (I’ve edited the post to be less vague in that regard). I agree that it makes sense to wear the most effective PPE someone is willing to, and it’s interesting to hear that you find elastometrics more comfortable.
Would you be willing to share which elastometrics you’ve liked? I started looking at P100s for the first time yesterday, but there is a bit less discussion of them than N95s.
While disposable N95 respirators can sometimes offer better protection for the wearer than any mask, they’re not that great due to the generally poor fit they provide.
Despite the high risk of leaks, N95s are probably a better solution for source control than masks due to their ability to filter out aerosols.
Reusable elastomerics offer better fit and more protection (N100) than N95s. There’s also somenon-anecdotal evidence that elastomerics are more comfortable than N95s. For me, elastomerics are more comfortable than even a surgical mask (due to less humidity and heat buildup) if wear time is long enough and if not engaging in a lot of physical activity.
The best N100/P100 particulate filter for a respirator is probably the 3M 2291 due to its lower pressure drop (that means it takes less effort to inhale) and that restricts respirator choices to the 3M 5000, 6000, 6500, and 7500 series (excluding respirators with full facepieces). Anecdotally, the effort to breath through the 2291 seems almost the same as breathing through an N95 filter. The 6500 and 7500 series probably has a somewhat better faceseal due to the more pliable silicone material that they use. Silicone also makes the faceseal hypoallergenic. I’ve seen some anecdotal reports that the 7500 is more comfortable than the 6500 due to (supposedly) slightly more pliable silicone. Personally, I’ve felt no significant difference in comfort between the rubber faceseal of the 6000 and the silicone faceseal of the 7500.
It’s been claimed that a lot of fake filters are on the market, so I’d try to acquire them from a reputable source like an established hardware distributor.
The best study (an RCT) I’ve seen claims that cloth masks made no statistical difference in case reduction, whereas surgical masks reduced risk by 11% and 35% for people over 60. The study authors speculate that if more people wore masks (less than 50% did), this risk reduction would probably increase. The study was done in Bangladesh from November to January, and I suspect that the variants in circulation at that time were a lot closer to the less contagious original strain. If that’s the case, it would be less likely that more mask wearing would increase risk reduction as the authors claim.
Effective PPE could have stopped the surge, whereas masks didn’t. Therefore, masks offer poor protection. Studies likes these only quantify how poor that protection actually is.
Recommendations should be based on the best approaches available rather than on trying to guess the personal preferences of most people. I’m sure that the “embarrassing, uncomfortable, and inconvenient” argument was leveled against masks at the start of the pandemic but most people don’t complain about them too much today. The same mistake was repeated during the winter surge for disposable N95s. However, there were some exceptions like Germany and California which started recommending N95-equivalent PPE. I find N95s too uncomfortable to wear, but I feel a lot better wearing elastomerics. Should my subjective personal preferences form the basis of general recommendations? No, and I don’t see why your preferences or speculations about the preferences of others should either.
Thanks for that reply. I’m realizing that part of the disagreement here is that I was vague and used “mask” to refer to n95s as well. (I’ve edited the post to be less vague in that regard). I agree that it makes sense to wear the most effective PPE someone is willing to, and it’s interesting to hear that you find elastometrics more comfortable.
Would you be willing to share which elastometrics you’ve liked? I started looking at P100s for the first time yesterday, but there is a bit less discussion of them than N95s.
While disposable N95 respirators can sometimes offer better protection for the wearer than any mask, they’re not that great due to the generally poor fit they provide.
Despite the high risk of leaks, N95s are probably a better solution for source control than masks due to their ability to filter out aerosols.
Reusable elastomerics offer better fit and more protection (N100) than N95s. There’s also some non-anecdotal evidence that elastomerics are more comfortable than N95s. For me, elastomerics are more comfortable than even a surgical mask (due to less humidity and heat buildup) if wear time is long enough and if not engaging in a lot of physical activity.
The best N100/P100 particulate filter for a respirator is probably the 3M 2291 due to its lower pressure drop (that means it takes less effort to inhale) and that restricts respirator choices to the 3M 5000, 6000, 6500, and 7500 series (excluding respirators with full facepieces). Anecdotally, the effort to breath through the 2291 seems almost the same as breathing through an N95 filter. The 6500 and 7500 series probably has a somewhat better faceseal due to the more pliable silicone material that they use. Silicone also makes the faceseal hypoallergenic. I’ve seen some anecdotal reports that the 7500 is more comfortable than the 6500 due to (supposedly) slightly more pliable silicone. Personally, I’ve felt no significant difference in comfort between the rubber faceseal of the 6000 and the silicone faceseal of the 7500.
It’s been claimed that a lot of fake filters are on the market, so I’d try to acquire them from a reputable source like an established hardware distributor.
This is incredibly helpful, thank you!