Here are the more detailed results of @CriticalAerosol 's testing, using a PortaCount! Thanks again, @CriticalAerosol!
https://twitter.com/CriticalAerosol/status/1785716393834582056
@CriticalAerosol ran a subset of the OSHA respirator fit-testing procedure (e.g. normal breathing, deep breathing, side-to-side, etc).
Several scenarios: 1. windows & doors cracked (10" away from breathing area vs. 12"), using ambient aerosol. 2. No ventilation, with salt aerosol. As we can see the "windows & door cracked" scenarios generally have higher perfomance than the ones in the "no ventilation" scenario.
Not sure why that's the case. Could be more optimal placement of the device in the kitchen scenario, could be differences in aerosol type in the two locations. Not really sure.
⚠️ What's consistent though is that side-to-side head movements lowers the performance significantly (FF 4.2, 4.9, 2.2, 10, 2.8). Best to keep your head right in the middle.
Anyway, overall fit factor of 5-10 means that conservatively speaking, the device reduces your dose of aerosols by a factor of 5-10. So if there are 100 particles that you could breathe in without the device, you'll inhale about 10 - 20 instead of 100.
Can order here: breathesafe-llc.myshopify.com/products/lamin…
If you're into DIY and have access to a 3D printer, you could print and build one yourself. Save money for shipping and labor: github.com/Edderic/air-cl…
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
