Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
1–10 of 134 posts
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#2The main thing is consistency, as ovens/cookers are temperature controlled. Other bootleg options are available:
Household clothes driers can get hot enough as well, but not all of them do.
Cars on a hot day can also get to the desired 140-150f+ range.
Many dishwasher sanitize cycles as well
https://www.who.int/csr/sars/survival_2003_05_04/en/
https://dailyhomesafety.com/does-dryer-kill-bacteria-and-ger...
https://heatkills.org/how-hot/
https://www.quora.com/What-temperature-ballpark-does-the-hea...
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#3Don't just look at single studies. This is a meta-review resource: https://www.n95decon.org/implementation
It's a collaboration among the many people doing research on decontamination that also takes into account the tacit implementation knowledge of those who conducted the studies.
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#4Another way to clean masks is to put them in a bowl of hot water (at least 70°C) and add detergent. Let it sit for a few minutes and you‘re good to go.
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#5Many N95s are rated for a month (20 days) of 8 hours use. If you're only using them for a few hours a day you can stretch their life by quite a bit.
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#6I've heard you can use 151-proof grain alcohol in lieu of rubbing alcohol (which has disappeared entirely from store shelves for months) in order to sanitize things. Apparently if you mix it with vegetable glycerin you can create your own ersatz hand sanitizer?
I was thinking you could create your own rubbing alcohol by mixing water, sugar, and yeast, distill it over your stove, and then combine it with aloe vera to create hand sanitizer, but that's probably less preferable than using store-bought ingredients that are more consistent.
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#7Generally,the instant pot requires at least 1 cup of water when running, according to the manual.
How does this work without water ?
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#8Many N95s are rated for a month (20 days) of 8 hours use. If you're only using them for a few hours a day you can stretch their life by quite a bit.
I’ve been using one for a while. I put it on for 30 minutes or so for only grocery shopping. Then stick it in a paper bag and don’t touch it for 7 days. Repeat.
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#9I've heard you can use 151-proof grain alcohol in lieu of rubbing alcohol (which has disappeared entirely from store shelves for months) in order to sanitize things. Apparently if you mix it with vegetable glycerin you can create your own ersatz hand sanitizer? I was thinking you could create your own rubbing alcohol by mixing water, sugar, and yeast, distill it over your stove, and then combine it with aloe vera to…
I’m not a medical professional, but since 151 is basically 75% ethanol, and ethanol is sold as a cleaner/disinfectant when pure, i assume it would work well.
Re: Electric cooker an easy, efficient way to sanitize N95 masks, study finds
#10Many N95s are rated for a month (20 days) of 8 hours use. If you're only using them for a few hours a day you can stretch their life by quite a bit.
That's what I've been doing with a pack of N100s and it works fine. The problem is threefold: leaving it in a car out in the sun will quickly melt the glue holding the plastic filter to the mask, after a few uses it just quickly gets contaminated on the inside unless you're obsessive about decontamination before taking the mask off each time, and that month rating is because the plastic fibers used to make the electrostatic filter dry out and crumble, which can also be pretty bad for your lungs.