If you thought that a simple surgical mask will protect you from being infected by swine flu virus, you were wrong. The Centre for Disease Control, United States, and doctors in Washington recommend use of N95 respirators for protection.
This they recommend both for the infected person and to those who get exposed to virus during their visits to hospitals and other places.
If you have a difficulty finding a right supplier of Swine flu face mask,N95 mask, H1N1 Face Mask, Disposable face mask, pig flu mask, bird flu mask!!!
We are providing masks in ready stock for Swine Flu. If interested contact us: Maulik Patel(+91-9727243530).
As the swine flu outbreak deepens, panicked citizens of North America are donning face masks. In Mexico City's downtown square, the Zócalo, for example, the army handed out face masks, and customs officials on U.S. borders are wearing protective personal gear, such as gloves and masks. (Click here for images.) But do surgical masks offer effective protection against viruses? In 2003, Jon Cohen wrote that the SARS virus, which is just 100 nanometers in size, can easily pass through such barriers. And there's every reason to believe that swine flu, at 80 to 120 nanometers, can, too. The original article is reprinted below.
Masks: a poor prophylacticThe dramatic photos of surgical-masked people walking the streets of Asian cities hit by severe acute respiratory syndrome pose the question: Do the masks offer them any meaningful protection against the disease?
Viruses, including the coronavirus that scientists believe may be the cause of SARS, are so tiny that they can easily pass through such barriers. Several studies even have shown that surgical masks fail to prevent transmission of the much larger mycobacterium tuberculosis, which causes TB. While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advises that people who have SARS wear these masks, they do not even recommend them for people in contact with those patients unless the infected person can't wear one. Wearing surgical masks outdoors, where virus-laden particles easily disperse, has even less value.
CDC does advise health-care workers working with SARS patients to wear a special mask called an N-95 respirator. But even these masks offer limited protection from coronaviruses. The name of the mask says it all. The "95" means the mask, if properly fitted—and that "fit factor" presents a big if—can filter out particles down to .3 microns 95 percent of the time. (A human hair is roughly 100 microns in diameter.) Human coronaviruses measure between .1 and .2 microns, which is one to two times below the cutoff.
The University of Cincinnati's Sergey Grinshpun has studied N-95 respirators and says it all comes down to "collection efficiency." N-95s made by different manufacturers have different collection efficiencies below the .3 cutoff. In other words, one company's mask, if properly fitted, might filter out 92 percent of coronaviruses, while another might catch only 50 percent.
"It seems to offer better protection than nothing," Grinshpun says. And he notes that viruses often travel on top of larger carrier molecules—like globs of mucus—making it easier to filter them. That's why CDC Director Julie Gerberding last week noted that covering your face with a T-shirt might help if you come in close contact with an infected person.
To efficiently protect yourself from coronaviruses, you would need to wear a full-faced mask with a high-efficiency particle air filter. But such HEPA filter masks cause what Grinshpun calls "quite a discomfort" in short order.Any mask clearly wards off one bug: fear. Confoun0064ingly, the sight of so many people wearing masks also spreads fear. And there's no measure of collection efficiency or fit factors that can help humans out of that pickle.
Masks: a poor prophylacticThe dramatic photos of surgical-masked people walking the streets of Asian cities hit by severe acute respiratory syndrome pose the question: Do the masks offer them any meaningful protection against the disease?
Viruses, including the coronavirus that scientists believe may be the cause of SARS, are so tiny that they can easily pass through such barriers. Several studies even have shown that surgical masks fail to prevent transmission of the much larger mycobacterium tuberculosis, which causes TB. While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advises that people who have SARS wear these masks, they do not even recommend them for people in contact with those patients unless the infected person can't wear one. Wearing surgical masks outdoors, where virus-laden particles easily disperse, has even less value.
CDC does advise health-care workers working with SARS patients to wear a special mask called an N-95 respirator. But even these masks offer limited protection from coronaviruses. The name of the mask says it all. The "95" means the mask, if properly fitted—and that "fit factor" presents a big if—can filter out particles down to .3 microns 95 percent of the time. (A human hair is roughly 100 microns in diameter.) Human coronaviruses measure between .1 and .2 microns, which is one to two times below the cutoff.
The University of Cincinnati's Sergey Grinshpun has studied N-95 respirators and says it all comes down to "collection efficiency." N-95s made by different manufacturers have different collection efficiencies below the .3 cutoff. In other words, one company's mask, if properly fitted, might filter out 92 percent of coronaviruses, while another might catch only 50 percent.
"It seems to offer better protection than nothing," Grinshpun says. And he notes that viruses often travel on top of larger carrier molecules—like globs of mucus—making it easier to filter them. That's why CDC Director Julie Gerberding last week noted that covering your face with a T-shirt might help if you come in close contact with an infected person.
To efficiently protect yourself from coronaviruses, you would need to wear a full-faced mask with a high-efficiency particle air filter. But such HEPA filter masks cause what Grinshpun calls "quite a discomfort" in short order.Any mask clearly wards off one bug: fear. Confoun0064ingly, the sight of so many people wearing masks also spreads fear. And there's no measure of collection efficiency or fit factors that can help humans out of that pickle.
Swine flu in India has already claimed five lives in last seven days. And if we believe Union health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad – one-third of the Indian population was likely to get infected with the virus over the next two years – which means about 33 crore Indians. What he however added that according to these WHO predictions – most people would suffer only mild symptoms of the disease.
Though the Government is trying to underplay the situation may be so that people do not panic – the situation is clearly alarming. Consider these statistics:
Argentina: 7 H1N1 infections and 337 deaths (Very low %)
USA: 6,506 with H1N1 infection and 436 deaths (6.7%)
Australia: 30,000 confirmed H1N1 cases with 85 deaths (0.28%)
India: 782 positive H1N1 cases 5 deaths (5.75%)
What looks like is that Indian pattern is more closer to USA. Evene if we consider Indian pattern in isolation and extrapolate the current situation (if not phenomenal measures are taken) then if 33 crore Indian are affected by H1N1 virus (as indicated by health minister) then at about 5% there will be huge loss of life. May be what the minister have meant that 33 crore people will be required to be screened and mush less will be the serious confirmed cases?
But in any way the situation is worse than you can think of and as an individual ensure that you take all precautions. And if you catch the virus immediately try to isolate yourself at a quarentine.