3 ms·

Yes. Surgicals are not meant for protection against airborne contaminants.

by monksy 4y ago

bluGill 4y ago
While that is true, surgicals do provide some protection. They cut your risk down significantly when worn correctly, though proper N95 (and other similar standards meant for airborne contaminants) will reduce risk a lot more.
throwaway2037 4y ago
I am surprised to see this type of reply in 2022. When I Google "do masks reduce COVID-19 transmission?", I get huge number of hits for peer reviewed published scientific papers. And most of the papers are focused on less-than-N95 masks. For the ones that I reviewed, the answer is overwhelming "yes", and a statistically significant reduction.
- monksy 4y ago
  So we have a few issues with that query. Do they reduce COVID 19 transmision is basically the same question as does a book stop a bullet. Yes. Is if sufficient? No. (Safe vs Safe-er) With aerosols, it's a lot out there, they're light, move from low pressure to high, and they float. (You need better protection, and you have to ensure that the filter does it's job, surgical don't and can't do that.. although the CDC tried to hack their way through that with "fit adjustments") With droplet, it requires those being projected, more affected by gravity, and it requires an entry point into entering you. (They're heavilier particles, and typically this is less likely to spread) All of the masking in the US is regulated by OSHA for the work world. (And is only for the working world.. no N95s for children) That's why N95s are required in hospitals (with workers, and only for workers are N95s required to be fit tested) in this case. Unfortuantely with a lot of the papers you see .. they tend to minimize what other country's population standards. I think they (KF94s, FFP2s, KN95 [if you have a trust worthy regulation body] etc) would be a better fit for the general population.

3 ms·

Yes. Surgicals are not meant for protection against airborne contaminants.

by monksy 4y ago

Yes. Surgicals are not meant for protection against airborne contaminants.

bluGill 4y ago
While that is true, surgicals do provide some protection. They cut your risk down significantly when worn correctly, though proper N95 (and other similar standards meant for airborne contaminants) will reduce risk a lot more.
throwaway2037 4y ago
I am surprised to see this type of reply in 2022. When I Google "do masks reduce COVID-19 transmission?", I get huge number of hits for peer reviewed published scientific papers. And most of the papers are focused on less-than-N95 masks. For the ones that I reviewed, the answer is overwhelming "yes", and a statistically significant reduction.
- monksy 4y ago
  So we have a few issues with that query. Do they reduce COVID 19 transmision is basically the same question as does a book stop a bullet. Yes. Is if sufficient? No. (Safe vs Safe-er) With aerosols, it's a lot out there, they're light, move from low pressure to high, and they float. (You need better protection, and you have to ensure that the filter does it's job, surgical don't and can't do that.. although the CDC tried to hack their way through that with "fit adjustments") With droplet, it requires those being projected, more affected by gravity, and it requires an entry point into entering you. (They're heavilier particles, and typically this is less likely to spread) All of the masking in the US is regulated by OSHA for the work world. (And is only for the working world.. no N95s for children) That's why N95s are required in hospitals (with workers, and only for workers are N95s required to be fit tested) in this case. Unfortuantely with a lot of the papers you see .. they tend to minimize what other country's population standards. I think they (KF94s, FFP2s, KN95 [if you have a trust worthy regulation body] etc) would be a better fit for the general population.