Comme vous le savez probablement déjà, etee signifie « tout est lié » . Notre objectif est que tous nos produits proviennent de la terre et y retournent, c'est-à-dire qu'ils utilisent des ingrédients biodégradables, éco-certifiés (non toxiques) et sans plastique.
Alors que nous sommes en pleine pandémie mondiale, nous sommes confrontés au défi de rester fidèles à notre mission tout en assurant la protection que les gens méritent.
Vous voyez, bien que nos masques s'inscrivent parfaitement dans cette mission (ils sont fabriqués en coton biologique certifié GOTS et sont réutilisables), il est recommandé d'utiliser un filtre pour garantir une protection maximale.
Nous avons donc examiné les options de filtration et la plus rapide à obtenir, la moins chère et la plus testée est le filtre jetable/à usage unique PM2.5 multicouche à charbon actif (avec des couches de tissu synthétique soufflé à l'état fondu), MAIS il est à usage unique et ne se biodégradera pas de sitôt.
Lot de 10 masques PM2.5 jetables/à usage unique pour 10,99 $. Commercialisation rapide, à usage unique et non biodégradable, efficacité prouvée contre les virus.
À l'autre extrémité du spectre se trouve le filtre en coton, plus cher, dont la mise sur le marché sera plus longue et dont l'efficacité n'est pas aussi éprouvée.
Filtres en coton antibactérien réutilisables - lot de 4 pour 12,00 $ US. Commercialisation lente, biodégradables, chers et efficacité non prouvée.
Une autre option qui fait son apparition dans les cercles de bricolage est le filtre à café. Son efficacité reste à prouver, mais il serait biodégradable et moins coûteux à produire.
Filtres en papier jetables (type filtre à café) - lot de 20 pour 5,99 $. Mise sur le marché rapide, biodégradables, efficacité non prouvée.
Donc, compte tenu de cela, et au vu de la pandémie, il nous semble plus judicieux de commercialiser le filtre PM2.5 le plus rapidement possible tout en continuant à étudier des options plus durables, tant du point de vue de l'empreinte écologique que du point de vue de la fonctionnalité.
commentaires
We purchased your masks and are already using coffee filters with them. The small pocket that your masks have sewn in are very small and make it difficult to insert. We fold them in half and open them once they’re in…not that easy to do. It would be good if you made the pocket larger to accommodate whatever filter you choose.
I like the coffee filter option. I’m “high risk” due to being age 68 but realize the purpose of mask wearing is to protect others vs. myself so economical vs. efficacy is fine, especially when biodegradable. That’s my vote!
Considering the options and the reasons, at this point I think using the carbon filters with an announcement that we’re working on finding a biodegradable option is the right choice. That this is being done in order to help people when alternatives aren’t readily available. I think people will ‘get it’.
Have received my masks. Didn’t realize there was a pocket for a filter. Looked and found the slit in the middle of the back there, it would definitely be a challenge to get a filter through that opening. I’m using it when out in public, shopping, etc. and in the office when necessary. I would think that people in some sort of direct medical care position would be wanting a better overall seal than these masks can provide. (Like the N95s.) Is there some study that indicates how much more protection a filter adds to this type of mask design or is it a ‘more has to be better’ approach? Comparing the etee mask with the similar looking single layer disposable blue surgical masks, I’m wondering if the etee mask, ‘as is,’ with its dual layers of cotton is providing more protection than those disposables? (Glad to be taking part in etee’s buy one, donate one program.)
Your cotton filter looks like a few layers of woven cotton bandaging pads. That would be easy to make and probably cheaper.
Since rebreathing your own carbon dioxide is not healthy, you might consider something with a respirator for all day wear. Don’t know if that can be incorporated with a washable mask. I will be out all day for a medical procedure in a few weeks, and am concerned about wearing a mask that long.
I’m not interested in the disposable option or the coffee filter option (I can make that myself), and the reusable filter would be OK but I could make those myself too. Here is a story from NPR about nylon stockings repurposed as filters—surprisingly they work pretty well:
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/22/840146830/adding-a-nylon-stocking-layer-could-boost-protection-from-cloth-masks-study-find
Might be an idea you could use.
Why do we need a filter to begin with? The mask is to protect others, not yourself. If you want to protect yourself you need a medical grade mask (mind it’s quite difficult to breathe wearing that one, especially if you’re active), you need to shield your eyes, and then follow strict protocols. How many people are actually going to do that?
I have recently read an article about the most effective materials for mask air filtration in Business Insider – https://www.businessinsider.com/the-materials-that-filter-particles-best-in-homemade-masks-testing-2020-4
This says that using blue shop towels as filters can improve filtration and provides a two mask patterns.
Filters are a balance of a few things, I think. Comfort is one thing because if you aren’t breathing comfortably, you are less likely to use the filter. The most effective filter is still only as effective as the fit of the mask which is relative in cotton masks and varies with face size and shape. Given that cloth masks will unlikely reach a filtration level of an N95 as there are no seals around the mask, I think the cotton filter is the most desirable combination of sustainability, reasonable protection, and comfort.
Best to go with the proving when it comes to a breathing health issue. I would also look into vacuum cleaner bag material I have heard that that has close to an N 95 rating. I do not know if those are recyclable though.