The three main types of face mask.

by James A. Bacon

So, society is back to wearing masks. Governor Ralph Northam has mandated mask usage in public schools, while many universities and employers in Virginia are doing the same.

The K-12 mandate does make accommodations for people who are eating, drinking, sleeping, exercising, playing a music instrument, and/or is in  state of unconsciousness. (I’m not making that up). Clearly, mandating masks represents an advance over closing the schools for another year. But Northam’s latest executive order provides no guidance on one important question. What kind of masks should children wear?

Go to Amazon.com and type in “disposable face masks.” You’ll find more than 1,000 products for sale. Not all masks are equally effective at protecting people and preventing viral spread. Insofar as some masks may accumulate germs if they go unwashed, they may be worse than useless for children’s health.

Will the mask mandate make children more safe, or less? I don’t know the answer, but I think it’s important to ask the question. To bone up on the issue, I delved into a June 2020 white paper, “Washable Face Masks,” an analysis of alternatives prepared by the Center for Applied Innovation in response to a request from Arlington County for 100,000 washable masks.

(By way of background, the Center for Applied Innovation is owned by Bob Morris, who sued the state after losing a bid for the Virginia Military Institute racism-investigation contract.)

Only N-95 masks provide much protection for the wearer. Good luck trying to get a school kid to keep one of those on his face all day. The alternative is wearing the kinds of masks examined in the white paper, which are designed mainly to protect others from your coughing, sneezing, wheezing, and expectorating.

Broadly speaking, there are three categories of non-N-95 masks: (1) surgical-style masks, (2) face-conforming masks, and (3) self-sanitizing face-conforming masks.

Loose-fitting surgical masks are not designed to provide a tight fit around the nose and mouth. Their purpose is to catch bacteria shed in liquid droplets and aerosols from the wearer’s nose and mouth, not to protect the wearer from inhaling airborne virus particles spewed by others. Says CAI: “Validated scientific studies show they provide partial to no protection for the mask wearer.”

Face-conforming masks provide somewhat better protection. But CAI warns that the quality of construction matters. Most masks are made of two layers of fabric, and in some cases with three, with an emphasis on how easy they are for wearers to breathe through.

Says CAI: “The majority of these face masks on the market today by re-purposed manufacturing operations are made to a layer density similar to what the CDC defines as a “T-shirt” or “home-made face mask” with the associated minimal level of protection. … The risk factors increase significantly when they are intended for use by employees in a work environment over the course of an entire work day.”

A third category of masks is the “self-sanitizing” mask, which are the only ones found in the CAI market survey that address the risk of face-touching and transfer of pathogens from the surface of the mask. Some vendors claim that their masks kill pathogens, and the evidence for copper-infused masks is positive, but in many cases the claims have not been scientifically verified. 

I could find no guidance in Northam’s executive order of the Virginia Department of Health’s “Back to School Safety Guide” regarding which kind of masks children should wear. Apparently, the thinking is that any mask is better than none, and it may not matter much if the purpose is for the mask wearers to protect others, not themselves.

Parents of school children may have considerations of their own. For starters, price is likely to be a factor — especially for children in lower-income families. Second, parents will gravitate toward easy of acquisition. Can they find the masks at CVS or order them on Amazon? Third, parents will opt for the flimsier, thinner, easier-to-breathe-through masks that their children will wear with less protestation.

“We know that masking is an effective tool to prevent the spread of COVID-19, particularly among children who are not yet eligible for vaccination,” says Virginia Health Commissioner Dr. Norm Oliver.

Do we, in fact, know that? Both sides of the masks-in-schools debate can find studies to back up their point of view. Skeptics make the point that the more protective the mask, the more they restrict breathing and allow CO2 to build up. They also argue that masks, unless washed, will accumulate pathogens over time. And, if washed, their effectiveness as filters will diminish.

I would conjecture that the efficacy of the mask mandates likely vary with the type of masks worn and the diligence with which children wear them. I would bet that the vast majority of masks worn by Virginia school children will be the cheaper, flimsier, less protective variety. If that surmise is correct, will they make a difference?

I’m more impressed by what we don’t know than what we do know. If Virginia is going to mandate masks for school children, perhaps the state could take a tiny slice of the billions of helicoptered COVID-relief dollars to monitor the results to ensure that the mandate does what it’s supposed to do.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

21 responses to “Not All COVID-Fighting Masks Are Created Equal”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I don’t think the state is the proper organization to “monitor effectiveness”. That’s a job for institutions and agencies who do research – like the CDC or John Hopkins, etc…

    But what keeps the state and schools from using COVID money to buy and provide masks and to choose ones that research has shown them to be effective?

    I suspect most schools are actually going to have to provide masks – kids lose stuff all the time and adults do too and forget!

  2. FINALLY — Capt. Obvious lives!

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      I was thinking the same thing. But … someone had to say what Jim wrote.

      Masks might work but mask mandates don’t.

      For months I’d walk into my favorite restaurant on Earth (Mookie’s BBQ in Great Falls, Va) wearing a mask. I’d look directly at the bartender (Jessie) and she would start pouring a glass of the rotating IPA on tap (always from a Virginia brewer). As soon as the glass hit the table the mask came off. It didn’t go back on until I walked the 15 feet required to leave.

      Regards,

      Commodore DJ Rippert

  3. If your child is awake, but identifies as unconscious, does he/she/it/they/zie/sie/ey/ve/tey/e/ucs have to wear a mask?

    1. Matt Adams Avatar
      Matt Adams

      What is the mask offends the child?

      I don’t know when the last time all these illustrious folks dealt with a 2 year old, but I can assure you that they don’t do anything unless they want to.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      I literally laughed out loud when I read that comment. Well played, Wayne.

      Regards,

      Commodore DJ Rippert

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    This is the mask I bought for Covid-19… but I don’t recall.

    https://assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2017/11/4/6/3/8/63840ba3-efbf-4c6c-9396-06227a697457.jpg

    1. Think of the fun school boards can have deciding which masks to ban because they _____ (fill in your favorite malign concern). You know how children like to test limits.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        Hey man a rodeo clown got ostracized and fired for wearing the “wrong” mask.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      What was that “All in the Family” theme song verse?

      Mister, we could use a man like Ronnie Reagan again?

      Hell, I’d settle for Jimmy Carter.

      At least he was alert and honest even if he was usually wrong.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Hoobert Heaver

  5. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    The never shy to offer an opinion Dr. Scott Gottlieb usually says the cloth mask is 20% better than nothing, the medical grade procedure mask 40% better than nothing and the N95 can be 95% better. In all those cases he assumes a snug fit, which is usually not the case. Gonna be back in an airport in ten days and I’m going to go light because I remain confident the vaccination is my best protection (also something Gottlieb says.) Have the 95’s if I need them….

    He sees limited value to the masks, but not no value, and advocates layered protection that includes them. This is viral, not bacterial, and that makes the masks far less useful.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Ha, I must have read wrong. I thought you said masks are not effective? But where exactly is Gottlieb getting his numbers? I don’t see such specificity from the CDC, so is Gottlieb citing research?

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Well the 95 in N95 must mean something. I’ll accept the numbers.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      That wasn’t right. Gimme a minute.

      Given P is the probability of a successful transmission between two persons without masks, then the probability of transmission between two persons wearing masks is P = (1-X)*(1-Y)*P, where X and Y are the mask factors given. So a cloth mask and a surgical mask would have a probability of

      P = 0.8*0.6P = 0.48*P.

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      BTW, I take issue with that 20%. My wife made me a mask that is two layers of 1500 thread count sheet material with a piece of shopping bag plastic in between. She keeps putting on me while I’m sleeping.

  6. Our savior ‘Finger in the Wind’ Fauci wrote back in a Feb. 5, 2020 message. “The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through the material.”

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      It can and does, but how far does it go if there was no mask at all? No mask is going to block 100% but even a rudimentary mask will block some.

      That’s another reason why the other part is the social distancing.

      People are expecting whatever Fauci said months ago to be the unchangeable fact whereas as more data and evidence was collected the view of it did (and should have) changed.

      Those who expect whatever is said to never change – what are they really expecting?

      If science changes it’s assessments – it’s a “lie” ?

      1. so are you saying the droplets which existed in 2020 are different from the droplets which exist today? the masks are the same, the droplets are the same; thus the statement stands now as it did then.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Well, yes and no. The point is that more research and evidence was gathered over time and earlier thoughts and beliefs changed as they learned more.

          That’s normal and expected.

          It does not mean the original assessments were “lies” any more than it would mean science changed it’s mind about some substance causing cancer or their thinking about tektonic plates, El Nino, etc.

          You can go back and look at research that concluded certain things and 10, 20 years later, it turned out incorrect because they did not know all that they would ultimately find out.

          30 years ago – one measure of mercury causes cancer, today the measure than causes cancer is different.

          The droplets issue is a good example. It’s more than just droplets It’s how a given virus replicates and transmits.

          These are things that takes time to really fully understand. There are no quick answers of absolute truth.

          That’s not the way that science works.

          Fauci’s mannerisms turn people off. It turns me off but focusing on him as a liar who just by himself mislead millions is just plain ignorant IMHO.

Leave a Reply