4 ms·
This study was not about observing infections or exposing people, it was about movement and interaction patterns. Every single participant was tested before the
by swimik 6y ago
This study was not about observing infections or exposing people, it was about movement and interaction patterns. Every single participant was tested before the event, and only those with negative results were allowed to participate. Of course it's not risk free, but it seems to be highly unlikely that anyone of the volunteers will be harmed (especially since they are all younger than 50).
- corgihamlet 6y agoAnd they were required to wear FFP3 (N95) masks.
- im3w1l 6y agoFFP3 is N99. It's better than N95.
- GuB-42 6y agoAFAIK, they gave FFP2 masks, which are like N95. FFP3 masks are usually not preferred for Covid-19 because they supposedly don't offer that much more protection and they are less comfortable. Because of their greater airflow restriction, they are often fitted with valves, that makes them much less effective at protecting others. FFP3/N99 respirators are mostly used in industrial settings to protect against very fine particles like asbestos dust.
- dathinab 6y agoThere had been a small study recently that indicates that N95 masks with valve are likely worse then normal surgical masks (and even some self made ones). While fitted N95 make are already "excellent" wrt. Protecting others. Only gotcha it's that the study was about introducing a simpler affordable way to measure the effectiveness of masks wrt. protecting others and get feeback for that method, so the number of tests they did are to small to be anything then an indicator for what might maybe be the result in a large study using that method.
- im3w1l 6y agoSo this may be stupid but could you like tape some cloth over the valve to catch the droplets?
- dathinab 6y agoActually that might work. Through it should be noted that the valved mask where still reasonable good. Actually even a bandanna reduced the amount of water droplets in the air by nearly 50% (if I remember correctly) or at least the one they tested did so. But fleece turned out to be terrible as it spliced the droplets into many smaller ones without hindering them much increasing the total amount of droplets in the air. Thinks like that are why I thing we should have a larger study with that method or similar methods. Because we don't know if all fleece masks are as bad or even worse then no mask or if it was just that fleece mask and if therefore we need to count fleece based home made masks as wearing no mask. (This also would mainly affect people using fleece based scarfs as both scarf and mask as well as people having a fleece based cycler mask and using it as a protection mask too)
- dathinab 6y agoI thing you had a typo and wanted to write "FFP2 (N95)" mask (which had been used in that study, at least in the sources I have read).