Another good study simulating effects of masks, HEPA cleaners, ventilation in a small meeting room. By NIOSH team incl. Lindsley, et al. mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/1…
🔸 Masks reduced aerosol by 50% +
🔸 Additive further exposure reduction w/ any combo of HEPA, ventilation
Summary 🧵
2/ For reference, this is essentially the same NIOSH team that did some other really nice work on masks and air cleaners:
e.g.:
3/ The experimental team here used one aerosol source (0.3 - 3 microns) and three recipients, in various combinations. They used a relatively small room (54 m3) with 2 ACH on low fan speed in order to simulate a realistic meeting-type room.
4/ In all cases, universal masking of 4 "participants" reduced aerosol exposure (see diff. between left/right bars ⬇️). Placement & distance also matters. Face-to-face orientation was worst (obv) when unmasked.
Yellow = source; three others = recipients.
5/ Similar to last perspective, but with speaking source (yellow) facing three participants in audience. Person most directly in-line had greatest exposure, but not much different from others farther away. Masks helped a great deal.
6/ Using mechanical HVAC system on three speeds (resulting in 2, 4, 6 ACH) reduced exposure by "~5% per unit increase in air change per hour (ACH)". Again, masks add to further exposure reduction.
ASHRAE & others have recommended for pandemic to crank the delivery of clean air.
7/ Adding 1 or 2 HEPA air cleaners around the room at several locations (when HVAC at 2 ACH) also reduced exposure, whether participants masked or not. Putting HEPAs in center (black bars) reduced exposure the most.
8/ By modeling the aerosol concentration across the whole room, they showed effect not just for three experimental recipients, but for others as well.
Adding HEPA purifiers, especially centrally in room produced lowest exposure (darker colors).
9/ They also tabulated the noise volume (dB) for the various scenarios. One pushback against adding HEPA is the possible noise. This is one factor when choosing a HEPA unit for your needs.
10/ Their work adds to a strong body of literature showing the additive effects of layered aerosol reduction strategies. All layers help:
🔸Masks, especially when tight & high filtration quality
🔸Ventilation, HVAC or windows
🔸Room filtration, HEPA matched to size & placed well
11/ So if you are thinking about getting a HEPA filter for yourself, or maybe as a donation for a school -- do it! See various practical tips & info here:
12/ And if you're looking to a mask for airborne virus protection -- Any mask better than none, BUT wearing one with the best quality & best fit is key. Upgrade to a #BetterMask like an N95, KF94/KN95 from a reputable source, or an elastomeric respirator.
Well-maintained HVAC filters or portable air cleaners can “also clean the air of pollen particles, mold spores & pollution from car exhaust and industrial operations. And in areas where wildfires are common, filters reduce the concentration of smoke particles inside buildings.”
[In schools that increase ventilation rate] “For kids and school staff, particularly those with asthma, allergies and sensitivities, this can mean fewer missed days of school, less medication, and fewer asthma attacks and subsequent trips to the hospital.” onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/in…
A family emergency means I’m flying today for the first time since 2019. Fortunately I’ve got my N95 to reduce my inhaled dose as much as possible + my CO2 meter to gauge air.
Short 🧵 to occupy me while on a layover.
The CO2 was nicely & low in the Shreveport, LA airport (1/x)
2/ On this tiny United commuter flight, 45 minute flight time from Shreveport to Houston, no one with N95 masks. Maybe 2 w/ surgical masks.
Boarding & taxi process, the #AirplaneCO2 briefly peaked at 1600 ppm, but mostly in 1100 range. Obviously higher than ideal, but not bad.
3/ Cruising (if you call it that for just a few minutes) was still in the 1000 - 1200 ppm range. At that upper level, roughly 2% of the air is likely rebreathed from others on board. But the ventilation is also filtering resp. particles from background air relatively frequently.
Excellent OpEd by @linseymarr & @jljcolorado on the early and persistent confusion around the word "airborne" wrt the pandemic. It's a short overview on the effects of these miscomms across medical & disciplinary boundaries.
Some salient quotes, links (1/) time.com/6162065/covid-…
2/ “This fundamental misunderstanding of the virus disastrously shaped the response during the first few months of the pandemic & continues to this day. We still see it now in the surface cleaning protocols that many have kept in place even while walking around without masks. …”
3/ “… There is a key explanation for this early error. In hospitals, the word “airborne” is associated w/ a rigid set of protective methods, incl. the use of N95 respirators by workers and negative pressure rooms for patients. These are resource-intensive and legally required.”
Clarifies N95s aren't in short supply & can be worn again!
It's still not perfect, but it feels like we're at least inching in the right direction. Some thoughts via a🧵.
2/ New statement that most respirators (i.e. #N95s) "are disposable and should be discarded WHEN they are dirty, damaged, or difficult to breathe through."
That's *much* better guidance than to toss after a single use!
3/ Also clearly states that:
"Loosely woven cloth products provide the least protection ... and well-fitting NIOSH-approved respirators (including #N95s) offer the highest level of protection."
Improves a procedure to expose surrogate proteins to urban air (especially NO2, O3) to quantify changes in protein nitration ➡️ allergies, etc.
1/🧵
2/ @DaveyRachel1 did a great job of quantifying & improving each step of the #bioanalytical procedure; ozone loss across PM filters, extraction & detection efficiencies, even good old analytical #FiguresOfMerit sensitivity & limit of detection. rdcu.be/cEJN7
3/ Possibly the most broadly useful piece is the data showing ozone loss across several filter types. The HEPA capsule scrubbed >60% of the ozone (bad if you're trying to quantify ozone). Kynar removed only 3%.
Important if using filter to remove PM, while quantifying O3 behind.