Posted on 04/26/2009 10:09:23 PM PDT by doug from upland
I use the N95 regulaly while dealing with patients infected with airborn and droplet transmissable diseases. I suppose it is effective enough for these cases but I prefer the nanomask in my survival kit. It fits better and I know it filters better. I believe it would even filter out prions which is a consideration to me. What’s more, in the event of a weaponized virus, I would prefer the nanomasks improved capabilities. As far as “critical mass to get an infection” goes by the way, it depends on the pathogen. A weaponized virus might induce symptoms after inhaling a very small number of particles for instance. Like I say, I prefer my nanomask even though I use a N95 at work for just this sort of thing.
Use them all the time when I’m sanding old wood to remove shilac and varnishes.
The virus must remain attached to a moisture source such as a sputum droplet. When the droplets hit the masks, the masks stop the droplets and they dry out. The masks are not designed to stop the movement of a virus-sized particle.
FROM OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH:
gripe mexicana de cerdo
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.