See my reply to you above. That said, even if the virus was dry airborne as you assume, P3/N99 filters would still capture way above 99% of these particles as explained in my original post.
I don’t think that it’s safe to generalize “99% of particles” to “99% of virus particles”. It’s likely better than nothing and might even be adequate, especially since N95 seems to be the gold standard.
Yeah, it will be way more than 99% of virus particles since most virus particles are bound in larger droplets where filtration efficiency is much higher than 99 %.
See my reply to you above. That said, even if the virus was dry airborne as you assume, P3/N99 filters would still capture way above 99% of these particles as explained in my original post.
I don’t think that it’s safe to generalize “99% of particles” to “99% of virus particles”. It’s likely better than nothing and might even be adequate, especially since N95 seems to be the gold standard.
Yeah, it will be way more than 99% of virus particles since most virus particles are bound in larger droplets where filtration efficiency is much higher than 99 %.
And, as I’ve said above, I think that it’s not sufficiently safe to assume that they inactivate within seconds of drying out.