Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well • Hacker News Board

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#221

Post by seanmcdirmid » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 12:06 AM UTC

thepasswordis wrote: post #218

jondwillis wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to point out that the strategy of trying to get Omicron for future natural immunity against other strains, while probably one that will work based on what we know about viral competition, is wishful thinking and not based on scientific fact (show me a study and I’ll change my mind.)

Imagine if somebody said you were required to take an injection which infected you with omicron, else you would be prohibited from participating in society. I'd be okay with the option , but not the requirement .

> Imagine if somebody said you were required to take an injection which infected you with omicron, else you would be prohibited from participating in society.

But we just have to imagine that, since it doesn't occur in reality, right? Vaccines actually have some verification before they are thrown into the world, they aren't just injecting Omicron into your blood stream (which, actually, many anti vaxxers would prefer, since they are paranoid about mRNA vaccines for some reason).

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#222

Post by seanmcdirmid » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 12:13 AM UTC

JohnTHaller wrote: post #215

tomjen3 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one I have does not filter the exhalation, but I seem to remember that the goal of masks were to stop the spread and this one does.

If it doesn't filter the exhale, you're spreading to others. Especially if you're asymptomatic. That's one reason why many places (correctly) forbid masks with valves.

> That's one reason why many places (correctly) forbid masks with valves.

No wrong. The CDC has written guidelines here in favor of exhalation valves on N95 masks (which are filtered), the guidelines specifically recommend against not forbidding such masks if they are NIOSH-approved N95 ones:

from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirator-use...

My N95 filtering facepiece respirator has an exhalation valve. Is that ok? Will it protect both me and others?

Yes, an N95 filtering facepiece respirator will protect you and provide source control to protect others. A NIOSH-approved N95 filtering facepiece respirator with an exhalation valve offers the same protection to the wearer as one that does not have a valve. As source control, findings from NIOSH research suggest that, even without covering the valve, N95 respirators with exhalation valves provide the same or better source control than surgical masks, procedure masks, cloth masks, or fabric coverings. In general, individuals wearing NIOSH-approved N95s with an exhalation valve should not be asked to use one without an exhalation valve or to cover it with a face covering or mask. However, NIOSH-approved N95 respirators with an exhalation valve are not fluid resistant. Therefore, in situations where a fluid resistant respirator is indicated (e.g., in surgical settings), individuals should wear a surgical N95 or, if a surgical N95 is not available, cover their respirator with a surgical mask or a face shield. Be careful not to compromise the fit of the respirator when placing a facemask over the respirator.

[end quote]

Many countries will require N95 masks (many of which have valves, so that is acceptable). So on a plane from Amsterdam to Beijing, you might have to switch masks during the flight (because the Dutch, for reasons, don't allow valves in favor of less effective cloth/surgical masks, while the Chinese...for reasons, require N95 masks that might have valves).

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#223

Post by mindslight » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 12:24 AM UTC

sergers wrote: post #219

yosito wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, anti maskers demanding cosplay masks are making the rules at the hospital? Or am I misunderstanding something?

I am wondering if was a typo/spellcheck error for cosplay. Confused that they enforcing wearing a cosplay mask. All hospitals in my area make you take off your mask and wear a level 3 surgical mask. If you want to double up, wear your own mask on top is fine.

It wasn't a typo. I'm referring to surgical masks as cosplay masks, as they provide poor filtration compared to appropriate respiratory PPE. It was understandable that we made do when they were the best thing available. But their continued primacy in a developed country is a disgrace.

Cosplayers are too busy fighting anti-maskers to see that the basic reality that each one of us is the main party responsible for our own safety, and from focusing on that dynamic will protecting others follow. Imagine if the politicization of respiratory protection had been around the red tribe wanting to wear P100 valved respirators, and the blue tribe wanting a combo that filtered output.

Practically I'm a little surprised by the cosplay under N95 requirement, as that makes it impossible to visibly inspect the cosplay and also makes the sealing of the N95 worse. Never mind having to step back outside after receiving the cosplay, to avoid demasking in a crowded area. Although I might be happier with it because I could wear my P100 half-face on top rather than not really being able to put a cosplay mask over the P100's side filters. shrug everywhere has their brokenness.

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#224

Post by JohnTHaller » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 3:04 AM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #222

JohnTHaller wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it doesn't filter the exhale, you're spreading to others. Especially if you're asymptomatic. That's one reason why many places (correctly) forbid masks with valves.

> That's one reason why many places (correctly) forbid masks with valves. No wrong. The CDC has written guidelines here in favor of exhalation valves on N95 masks (which are filtered), the guidelines specifically recommend against not forbidding such masks if they are NIOSH-approved N95 ones: from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirator-use... My N95 filtering facepiece respirator has an exhalation v…

I am indeed wrong. Thanks for the details and the link. I hadn't checked in on the valve recommendations since early in the pandemic. I'd edit my above if I could.

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#225

Post by kcplate » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 7:01 PM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #209

kcplate wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think cloth masks are worthless for anything but the most casual exposure to the virus, and then for it to maintain any reasonable protective effect, you would need to remove and dispose of the mask as those luckily trapped virus particles can dislodge and infect. Continuing to wear a cloth mask that has accumulated virus particles in it just turns a chance casual exposure into a long term one. So one, y…

I think you are likely making up the exposure risk based on "conventional" wisdom. I imagine the actual efficacy gain of a simple cloth mask has nothing to do with "trapping" virus particles. My guess for where the actual efficacy comes from is 1) not being able to touch your mucus membranes with your hands anymore 2) limiting the amount of air circulating near your face by limiting induced currents due to your inhal…

Sure its CW, but my point was that any possible blocking of virus particles would be completely incidental/accidental, and because the mask is not effective at all at stopping those particles due to their size and weave of the cloth, anything incidentally blocked would not necessarily be blocked again but could still pass through even if you were no longer exposed to the initial source.

If you can point me to a peer reviewed study extolling the virtues of cloth masking, I’ll read it. But pretty much all of the positive masking studies with any real statistical benefit of protection seem to be centered around n95 or surgical masks—worn correctly and disposed of after one use.

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#226

Post by Misdicorl » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 10:59 PM UTC

kcplate wrote: post #225

Misdicorl wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are likely making up the exposure risk based on "conventional" wisdom. I imagine the actual efficacy gain of a simple cloth mask has nothing to do with "trapping" virus particles. My guess for where the actual efficacy comes from is 1) not being able to touch your mucus membranes with your hands anymore 2) limiting the amount of air circulating near your face by limiting induced currents due to your inhal…

Sure its CW, but my point was that any possible blocking of virus particles would be completely incidental/accidental, and because the mask is not effective at all at stopping those particles due to their size and weave of the cloth, anything incidentally blocked would not necessarily be blocked again but could still pass through even if you were no longer exposed to the initial source. If you can point me to a peer…

You can't have it both ways. Either simple cloth is not good at filtering the virus, and therefore we shouldn't care about retransmit risk from "trapped" virus. Or it is good at blocking them (like an n95) and you can start thinking/caring about second order effects like retransmission of trapped virus.

I don't need a peer review study to tell me to ignore the epsilon squared term when the epsilon term is already being argued to be marginal. If an article comes through claiming the inverse, that is surprising and worth communicating at large.

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#227

Post by kcplate » Tue, Jan 18, 2022, 12:58 AM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #226

kcplate wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure its CW, but my point was that any possible blocking of virus particles would be completely incidental/accidental, and because the mask is not effective at all at stopping those particles due to their size and weave of the cloth, anything incidentally blocked would not necessarily be blocked again but could still pass through even if you were no longer exposed to the initial source. If you can point me to a peer…

You can't have it both ways. Either simple cloth is not good at filtering the virus, and therefore we shouldn't care about retransmit risk from "trapped" virus. Or it is good at blocking them (like an n95) and you can start thinking/caring about second order effects like retransmission of trapped virus. I don't need a peer review study to tell me to ignore the epsilon squared term when the epsilon term is already bei…

No, I am not having it both ways. I don’t think cloth masks are effective at all. I’m responding to the “cloth masks are 5-33% effective” for incidental exposure commentary as a positive aspect of cloth masking. It’s a red herring that creates a false sense of security.

My point is that if a cloth mask is only partially effective for an incidental exposure than it must have been somewhat effective at a given moment, but due to virus size and cloth weaving…every moment that the particle didn’t reach your nasal passages due to that momentary chance then that virus still has a 67%-95% of entering you and infecting you every moment it is near you. So any incidental exposure becomes non-incidental.

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#228

Post by sergers » Tue, Jan 18, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #223

sergers wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am wondering if was a typo/spellcheck error for cosplay. Confused that they enforcing wearing a cosplay mask. All hospitals in my area make you take off your mask and wear a level 3 surgical mask. If you want to double up, wear your own mask on top is fine.

It wasn't a typo. I'm referring to surgical masks as cosplay masks, as they provide poor filtration compared to appropriate respiratory PPE. It was understandable that we made do when they were the best thing available. But their continued primacy in a developed country is a disgrace. Cosplayers are too busy fighting anti-maskers to see that the basic reality that each one of us is the main party responsible for our…

Thanks.

I have never heard of someone use cosplay/cosplayers that way.

Makes sense.

Off topic - where you from?

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#229

Post by Misdicorl » Tue, Jan 18, 2022, 2:48 AM UTC

kcplate wrote: post #227

Misdicorl wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't have it both ways. Either simple cloth is not good at filtering the virus, and therefore we shouldn't care about retransmit risk from "trapped" virus. Or it is good at blocking them (like an n95) and you can start thinking/caring about second order effects like retransmission of trapped virus. I don't need a peer review study to tell me to ignore the epsilon squared term when the epsilon term is already bei…

No, I am not having it both ways. I don’t think cloth masks are effective at all. I’m responding to the “cloth masks are 5-33% effective” for incidental exposure commentary as a positive aspect of cloth masking. It’s a red herring that creates a false sense of security. My point is that if a cloth mask is only partially effective for an incidental exposure than it must have been somewhat effective at a given moment,…

I appreciate you clarifying your reasoning. I think it's straight up crazy/magical reasoning. But to be honest I don't have much more confidence in my own conjectures on this matter.

Re: Ready for an N95? Here's how to find a high-quality one that fits you well

#230

Post by kcplate » Tue, Jan 18, 2022, 4:21 AM UTC

Misdicorl wrote: post #229

kcplate wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I am not having it both ways. I don’t think cloth masks are effective at all. I’m responding to the “cloth masks are 5-33% effective” for incidental exposure commentary as a positive aspect of cloth masking. It’s a red herring that creates a false sense of security. My point is that if a cloth mask is only partially effective for an incidental exposure than it must have been somewhat effective at a given moment,…

I appreciate you clarifying your reasoning. I think it's straight up crazy/magical reasoning. But to be honest I don't have much more confidence in my own conjectures on this matter.

I don’t see what’s all that magical about assuming something that is 33% effective at any given moment would not all of a sudden become 100% effective at every other moment. But perhaps when you roll a die the same number appears every time. I just know that when I roll a die I generally have a 1/6 chance that my first number comes up again on every roll I try.

Perhaps randomness and chance is magical. I always thought it wasn’t.