They don't find significantly more efficiency for N95 masks, but other studies do find N95 masks slightly better. (2)
(1) https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/184819
(2) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1750-2659...
Do a search on Google Scholar for "N95" in combination with "virus" or "sars" for more studies.
Really a shame that authorities, including the Surgeon General, claim that masks are not protective, despite medical science to the contrary.
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258525804_Testing_t...
[2] https://twitter.com/chaiclate/status/1232972182667612162?s=2...
Yes, it really hurts me, as a science-based person, to have scientists with authority say things that are unscientific.
> Quality commercial masks are not always accessible, but anecdotal evidence has showed that handmade masks of cotton gauze were protective in military barracks and in healthcare workers during the Manchurian epidemic.
> The prototype mask achieved a fit factor of 67 for 1 author with a Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) panel face size of 4, a common size. Although insufficient for the workplace, this mask offered substantial protection from the challenge aerosol and showed good fit with minimal leakage.
Please somebody show me data that proves otherwise, I'm totally open to it. (Note: I'm not saying I want you to post opinions from people in authority, I'm saying I want to see data)