The most and least effective fabric face masks to protect you from the coronavirus – BGR


  • A coronavirus facial mask study details the differences between some of the most effective and least effective fabric facial coatings you can buy or make yourself.
  • The study explains that any type of face mask will ultimately work, reducing the spread of particles resulting from coughing or sneezing.
  • The coronavirus spreads with the help of these invisible drops, which can travel through the air and even stay in certain conditions.
  • Wearing any mask is much better than no face mask, the study proves. So use one!

In a few years, when historians, or what remains of civilization, recall the great COVID-19 pandemic of 2020, they will have to talk about the face mask controversy that hampered global efforts to contain the disease. There is greater adversity when wearing masks in certain communities, and it has nothing to do with science.

Outdoor face covers of any type are recommended to reduce the spread of the virus. But politicians in the US and abroad managed to turn this life-saving tool into a political weapon, giving it a deeper meaning than it actually has. A mask will not prevent you from breathing normally and will not infringe on your freedom. But it can save lives, including yours.

Not all people oppose masks, and there are many types of masks to choose from now that there is no shortage of PPE. If you can’t find face masks in your immediate area and you’ve run out of existing supplies, you can always make your own, and there is new research showing exactly what types of fabric masks are effective at blocking pathogens and which ones. they are the best to avoid

Researchers from the Department of Oceanic and Mechanical Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, published a study on facial masks in the Fluid Physics diary. Scientists used a mannequin and laser cameras to observe how different types of mask materials can obstruct the breathing jets that appear when coughing and sneezing.

Existing research shows that small saliva particles expelled by coughing, sneezing, talking, and singing may be loaded with the virus. These particles can travel far beyond the six feet that are designated as safe in social distancing guidelines, especially the smallest droplets that become aerosols. That is why facial masks combined with social distancing can help in real life settings.

The authors pushed the smoke through different types of cloth face masks on the mannequin, and then looked at how far respiratory droplets in air could travel after crossing the barrier.

The conclusions are not surprising. The use of face masks can reduce the spread of particles significantly. A regular scarf can reduce the spread to an average of 3 feet 7 inches. A folded scarf is even better, lowering the range to 1 foot 3 inches. A stitched mask made of quilted cotton can reduce the spread to 2.5 inches. Comparatively, commercial masks made of various materials and with a random set of fibers, such as a CVS Cone face mask, reduce the extension to 8 inches. What the study did not cover are medical grade masks, which have been extensively studied.

The results indicate that any face mask will limit the spread of particles, even if leakage is a problem, as is the case with baggy homemade masks. “We observed that health professionals appropriately trained in the use of high-quality fitted masks are unlikely to experience leakage as we have observed in this study,” the researchers wrote.

The following study images show how far the particle cloud traveled for each of the various types of face masks the scientists studied.

Homemade mask made by folding a scarf:

From the study: “(a) A facial mask constructed from a folded scarf. Images taken at (b) 0.5 s, (c) 2.27 s, and (d) 5.55 s after the start of the emulated cough. “Image source: Siddhartha Verma, Manhar Dhanak, and John Frankenfield

Homemade mask sewn with two layers of cotton padded fabric:

From the study: “(a) A homemade face mask sewn with two layers of cotton padded fabric. Images taken at (b) 0.2 s, (c) 0.47 s, and (d) 1.68 s after the start of the emulated cough. “Image source: Siddhartha Verma, Manhar Dhanak, and John Frankenfield

A standard cone style mask:

From the study: “(a) A ready-to-wear cone-style mask. (b) 0.2 s after the start of the emulated cough. (c) 0.97 s after the start of the emulated cough. The main feather, which has considerably dissipated, is barely visible. (d) 3.7 s after the start of the emulated cough. “Image source: Siddhartha Verma, Manhar Dhanak and John Frankenfield

Chris Smith started writing about gadgets as a hobby, and before he knew it, he was sharing his views on technology topics with readers around the world. Every time you don’t write about devices, you unfortunately don’t stay away from them, even though you desperately try. But that is not necessarily a bad thing.

.