New Delhi: As deadly variants of the coronavirus take away precious lives and the threat of a possible third wave looms large, there is a sudden scramble for face masks that give the best protection against the killer virus and the choice obviously falls on masks that filter 94 to 95% airborne particles, even as tiny as 0.3 microns.
However, if you go online to search such masks, you are sure to be led astray by online sites displaying a wide variety of masks labelled ‘N-95’ but with no third party validation of the quality. In fact many of them claim to have certificates from a number of regulatory authorities around the world, including the US, Europe and China, and even use their logos, but if you look closely, you will realize that it is a pure lie because of the absence of any proof to the effect.
Consumers must know that N-95 is not a generic name. In fact the common term used for these masks is ‘Particulate Filtering Face Piece Respirators’ or FFPR and N-95 is one of the several types of FFPRs approved by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH ) and denotes a filtration efficiency of 95%. So, if a manufacturer calls his product as N-95 then it must have the approval of NIOSH, carry the approval number and must be listed on the website of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA. However, unscrupulous manufacturers are exploiting lack of consumer awareness to claim their product to be N-95 masks.
Having said that, I must point out that almost every country has its own equivalent standard . For example, it is P2 in Australia and DS2 in Japan. The corresponding Indian standard is FFP2 under IS:9473 . The Indian standard is aligned with the European standard EN149 of 1991 .(Europe has since revised it) Under European standard, these masks are classified as FFP1, FFP2 and FFP3, corresponding with minimum filtration efficiency of 80%, 94% and 99% respectively. India too classifies the masks under IS:9473 in a similar manner.
{{/usCountry}}Having said that, I must point out that almost every country has its own equivalent standard . For example, it is P2 in Australia and DS2 in Japan. The corresponding Indian standard is FFP2 under IS:9473 . The Indian standard is aligned with the European standard EN149 of 1991 .(Europe has since revised it) Under European standard, these masks are classified as FFP1, FFP2 and FFP3, corresponding with minimum filtration efficiency of 80%, 94% and 99% respectively. India too classifies the masks under IS:9473 in a similar manner.
{{/usCountry}}The good news is that the number of manufacturers selling ISI-marked FFP2 masks have steadily grown in the last one year and the number now stands at 246. They may not crop up prominently on online stores, but one can easily identify them on the BIS website. The link www.manakonline.in/MANAK/ApplicationLicenceRelatedrpt will take you to the list of ISI-certified manufacturers — all you need to do is to key in the relevant Indian standard — IS:9473. You can also download the BIS app- BIS CARE on your mobile phone and check out the manufacturer by keying in the license number. During the first wave, because of their acute shortage, these masks were reserved only for front line health workers and others were dissuaded from using them. There is no such rationing now.
The quality and effectiveness of these five layered respiratory protective devices depend on three important factors. While one is the quality of the filters and their performance, the other is their snug fit, with their edges designed to form a seal around the nose and the mouth. So besides tests to check their filter efficiency, the BIS standard puts a cap on the leakage of aerosol via filter penetration as well as the face seal (Total Inward Leakage) . Third, to ensure breathability and also the safety of the wearer, the standard also puts limits on the carbon dioxide content of the air within the mask . There are also several other tests that the mask has to go through before getting the quality seal.
Indian standard allows both ear loops and head bands but the latter would be far more comfortable and whatever your choice, adjust the strap to ensure a tight fit around the nose, cheek and the chin because however good the mask, it’s effectiveness decreases if it is worn loose.
Lastly, given the fact that these masks are our lifeline in these pandemic times, the government should not only bring all FFP2s under mandatory third party certification, but also ensure reduction in their price. At ₹45-90 a piece, these masks are not very pocket friendly for one-time use. The government should also distribute them free of cost to the poor.