Face masks to prevent illness

[Hamradioop]

CDC take on masks at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/topics/r ... pfact.html

[QUAID]

Has anyone tried the FFP3 face masks that Toolstation sell? Seem quite cheap to me, however, if they have reached the FFP3 standard then they can't be bad. However to prevent illness you have to adopt a 'complete solution to prevention - whilst avoiding walking down the street wearing full IPE, then you could (sorry if i'm teaching you to suck eggs but:
Avoid touching your face
Wear wrap around glasses
Wear a FFP3 (N95) mask
Wear gloves and use an alcohol based hand sanitizer
Avoid public places

[Malthouse]

It seems the best way to reduce the chance of infection is to put the mask on the infectious person, that way they get to keep their germs to themselves.

I think I saw a link to N-95 rated hoods on one of the other sites I go on....Let me have a dig around

+1 for that sentiment.

Also putting gloves on someone else if they have blood/fluids on their hands or cuts.

The best general solution is a face shield.

[QUAID]

I have come across some FFP3 face masks that have an 'expiration date'. I'm thinking that the classification of FFP3 comes down to the hole size in the weave.

SO, does anyone know if it makes a difference?
Will they last indefinately?
The elastic will probably detereorate over time but these have a date of 2012.

10 x 3M FFP3 masks for a £1 at a police auction!

[Devonian]

We use these for work involving asbestos, again FFP3 rated:

http://www.safetyservicesdirect.com/dis ... 2123-p.asp

Avoid the 'fold flat' versions, they are nowhere near as good as the cupped respirators and they tend to leak around the edges far more easily.

But as above if they are FFP3 rated, they "should" all offer the same levels of protection, but as with most things, cheap things are usually cheap for a reason!!

[Yorkshire Andy]

We use these for work involving asbestos, again FFP3 rated:

http://www.safetyservicesdirect.com/dis ... 2123-p.asp

Avoid the 'fold flat' versions, they are nowhere near as good as the cupped respirators and they tend to leak around the edges far more easily.

But as above if they are FFP3 rated, they "should" all offer the same levels of protection, but as with most things, cheap things are usually cheap for a reason!!

Suppose you will have been with your head in a bag and sprayed with Bitrex then

For those who havent seen it you should be face fit tested by a approved agent before use.....

also be clean shaven

It seems the best way to reduce the chance of infection is to put the mask on the infectious person, that way they get to keep their germs to themselves.

I think I saw a link to N-95 rated hoods on one of the other sites I go on....Let me have a dig around

If your doing that you want unvented P3 masks for obvious (i hope) reasons

I have come across some FFP3 face masks that have an 'expiration date'. I'm thinking that the classification of FFP3 comes down to the hole size in the weave.

SO, does anyone know if it makes a difference?
Will they last indefinately?
The elastic will probably detereorate over time but these have a date of 2012.

10 x 3M FFP3 masks for a £1 at a police auction!

again if valved the rubber in the valve can perish or split making them useless

[Devonian]

Suppose you will have been with your head in a bag and sprayed with Bitrex then

Oh, yes

[Yorkshire Andy]

Tastes lovely doesnt it

[Devonian]

Tastes lovely doesnt it

Only with a poorly fitted respirator

[Hamradioop]

'NaturalNews.com (formerly Newstarget) is an anti-science conspiracy website founded by Mike "the Health Ranger" Adams. The site promotes almost every sort of medical woo known to human history, though it specializes in vaccine denialism,[1] AIDS/HIV denial,[2] quack cancer medicine[3] and conspiracy theories about modern medicine.[4] Even other quacks think it's a quack site.[5] The site has recently broadened to include extreme environmentalism and conspiracy theorizing about Obama and gun control.
If you cite NaturalNews on any matter whatsoever, you are almost certainly wrong.'

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/NaturalNews