Von Brunn welcomes the end of the FFP2 mask requirement
The Bavarian SPD parliamentary group leader in the state parliament, Florian von Brunn, welcomes the end of the FFP2 mask requirement announced by Söder. According to von Brunn, Söder would find “a sense of proportion and corona protection”. However, the decision came too late: The SPD had long called for the FFP2 mask requirement to be lifted – there was no clear evidence that these masks provided better protection than medical masks, according to von Brunn. He emphasized, however, that everyone is still free to wear an FFP2 mask, if this is deemed necessary.
In addition, von Brunn suspects Söder’s calculation – “shortly before the federal election and in view of the poor poll numbers for the CDU and CSU”.
How are FFP2 and medical masks different?
Medical masks refer to mouth-nose protection masks (MNS) or so-called surgical masks. They differ fundamentally from the FFP2 masks in terms of their protective effect. In general, mouth and nose masks filter out some of the particles and viruses in the air. This reduces their concentration and thus the risk of infection. Exhaled virus particles are usually relatively large due to the adhering moisture, so surgical masks can also hold them back quite efficiently.
In the room air, however, the particles shrink – and can therefore pass through such masks when inhaled. They are better stopped by FFP2 masks. Surgical masks therefore primarily serve to protect other people, FFP2 masks also offer more self-protection.
However, emphasizes virologist Dr. Christoph Spinner in the BR podcast, both types of masks protect very well: “Even if the FFP2 masks theoretically offer a higher protective effect, there is no work known to me that shows that they are really too low in infection rates compared to, for example, medical ones Lead masks. The multi-layer or multi-layer medical masks offer a very, very good level of protection. Today they are inexpensive and available in sufficient quantities. “