3 ms·

Read their methodology, > A good example of this is in the text written on the front of N95 and KN95 masks. The standards for each of these masks demand that

Read their methodology, > A good example of this is in the text written on the front of N95 and KN95 masks. The standards for each of these masks demand that very specific information be printed on the device. If a KN95 mask does not have the manufacturer name and the standard number they are meeting (GB 2828-2019 or GB2828-2006), then they cannot be considered KN95 masks Such masks are marked failed. My guess is thats what happened here.

vertis 5y ago
I disagree with this methodology. At the very least it should be called out as the reason for the 'fail'. Yes, it's less than ideal to not follow the standard. But I would far rather an N95/KN95 mask that didn't have it correctly printed but otherwise passes the criteria than none at all. If it's a filtration test and it filters correctly give it a pass with an asterisk.
- lloydarmbrust 5y ago
  Yes the reasons for failing are in our testing notes being transcribed now. Over 250 hours of actual testing just to get to this part and with Omicron we wanted to get the raw data up ASAP. Notes should be live in about 275 of them hopefully today.
  - vertis 5y ago
    It's a nitpick. I'm glad someone is doing this.
pimlottc 5y ago
That doesn't seem to be the case here, the product images clearly show the required labeling and it's even pointed out specifically in the video review [0] at 3m30s. Would be good to see what the update notes say for this one. It might be because the product listing still claims it's approved from emergency use; the FDA rescinded the EUA for all non-N95 masks back in July [1]. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeYlKgOI8-w&t=210s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeYlKgOI8-w&t=210s 1: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/revoked-euas-non-niosh-approved-disposable-filtering-facepiece-respirators https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-use-authorizat...

vertis 5y ago

I disagree with this methodology. At the very least it should be called out as the reason for the 'fail'. Yes, it's less than ideal to not follow the standard. But I would far rather an N95/KN95 mask that didn't have it correctly printed but otherwise passes the criteria than none at all. If it's a filtration test and it filters correctly give it a pass with an asterisk.

lloydarmbrust 5y ago
Yes the reasons for failing are in our testing notes being transcribed now. Over 250 hours of actual testing just to get to this part and with Omicron we wanted to get the raw data up ASAP. Notes should be live in about 275 of them hopefully today.
- vertis 5y ago
  It's a nitpick. I'm glad someone is doing this.

pimlottc 5y ago

That doesn't seem to be the case here, the product images clearly show the required labeling and it's even pointed out specifically in the video review [0] at 3m30s. Would be good to see what the update notes say for this one. It might be because the product listing still claims it's approved from emergency use; the FDA rescinded the EUA for all non-N95 masks back in July [1]. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeYlKgOI8-w&t=210s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeYlKgOI8-w&t=210s 1: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/revoked-euas-non-niosh-approved-disposable-filtering-facepiece-respirators https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-use-authorizat...