[ad_1]
Scientists have found evidence that some of the masks on sale and used by the general public contain toxic chemicals.
Initial testing revealed effects of a variety of compounds that are severely restricted for environmental and health reasons.
This includes formaldehyde, a chemical known to cause tearing, burning in the eyes, nose, and throat, coughing, wheezing, and nausea.
Experts are concerned that the presence of these chemicals in masks worn for long periods could cause unwanted health problems.
Evidence obtained by Ecotextile News and shared with the British newspaper “Daily Mail” shows that although masks must meet certain standards, not all are.
Masks have been imposed around the world because they are a very effective way to prevent the transmission of Corona virus particles. But face covers designed for use by the general public do not meet the required standards and do not meet the same standards as personal protective medical equipment.
Professor Michael Prunggart, director of the Hamburg Environmental Institute, tested the masks that caused the eruption.
“What we breathe through our mouth and nose is actually dangerous waste,” said Professor Braungart.
The researchers found that these used masks contain formaldehyde and other chemicals.
Formaldehyde is a chemical that smells “clean” when you open a new pack of masks. He also found aniline, which is a known carcinogen.
“In the case of blue surgical masks, we found cobalt, which can be used as a blue dye,” Braungart added.
He continued: “In general, we have a chemical mixture in front of the nose and mouth that has never been tested for toxicity or long-term health effects.”
Dr. Dieter Sedlak, MD and co-founder of Modern Test Services in Augsburg, found other chemicals using his own unique test method.
In addition to detecting formaldehyde, he discovered clear evidence of dangerous fluorocarbons, which are severely restricted.
Fluorocarbons are toxic to human health and scientists recently called for them to be banned for unnecessary use.
“I honestly did not expect to find perfluorinated compounds in a surgical mask, but we have special routine methods in our labs to detect these chemicals easily and we can identify them immediately,” said Dr. Sedlak.
It appears that this substance was deliberately applied as a liquid repellent that works to repel the virus in the form of hazy droplets, but the fluoride-infused compound on the face, nose, mucous membranes, or eyes is not. all right.
PFCs are commonly used in textiles to add a protective layer to items like backpacks and jackets, but they are not designed to be inhaled.
Dr. Sedlak found that the PFC concentrations in the masks fell within the safe limit of 16 mg / kg, but when applied to the mask, just millimeters from a person’s mouth, the exposure level increased beyond of the safety limit over time.
Both academics say their work is not enough to conclude that all surgical masks are dangerous or comparable, but they believe that some of the masks in circulation are cause for concern.
“From my practical experience there are definitely excessively high risks,” says Dr. Sedlak.
Face covers designed for use by the public are not classified as personal protective equipment and therefore are not subject to the same level of scrutiny as those intended for medical professionals.
The results of these first studies come with the questioning of the quality of the masks used in Belgium and Canada, with graphene and contaminated metal ions.
Dr. Julian Tang, clinical virologist and associate professor emeritus in the Department of Respiratory Sciences at the University of Leicester, echoed the feeling of Dr. Sedlak and Professor Braungart that more active research was needed.
He said: “More studies on specific mask designs should be conducted if there is a potential risk for a particular mask, and masks made by different manufacturers may not present the same risks, if any.
He noted that if people are concerned about their masks, one of the best options is to use professional surgical masks that must meet stricter standards, according to the “Daily Mail.”
[ad_2]
