[lloydarmbrust]

A few things. The PFE test I'm doing is a 2min test and doesn't tell you what the mask will do under load (all day use). It's really a simple way to tell if the mask sucks but not if the mask is good (if that makes sense).

If someone doesn't label the mask correctly...are they even reading the standard?

The gb2626-2019 standard is 57 pages and in it you have to do a lot of very technical testing. One test requires several days of testing in a lab and is very expensive, but it's designed to make sure the mask performs under actual use (called the loading test).

If the manufacture isn't willing to put some simple words on a mask, do you think they did this complicated several-day test? Probably not.

IMO it's the brown M&M or canary in the coal mine test.

[pimlottc]

Thanks for the response. I understand your reasoning for failing the KN95s, but then what about the Lutema mask, which uses a proprietary standard? Lutema includes some lab test documents [0] but I can't find any technical information about what results exactly is required to qualify as an "M series" mask. They mostly seem to compare with with KN95 masks, but without really saying what makes them different [1] (note that the testing info on that page are for their surgical mask).

It seems like the "M series" designation is mostly a branding effort to make their masks stand out from the competition, and less about specific technical improvements.

I did look to see if you had a video on this mask but there doesn't seem to be one, would love to hear your take on this unusual designation.

And regarding the Boncare (et al) masks, I suspect the omission is at least partially motivated by style; it makes the mask less conspicuous for mainstream use. The labeling on most (passing) masks tends to be rather obtrusive.

0: https://lutema.com/collections/made-in-usa-masks/products/ad...

1: https://lutema.com/pages/m95-vs-kn95-masks

[jerlam]

The Lutema does not claim to have an internationally recognized standard, which is why it "passes" because there is no way to fail it.

The pass/fail column can be considered more of a "is this manufacturer lying?" field. Perhaps it needs another value if it doesn't claim any standards.

[dmwallin]

No way to fail it but you also can't pass a non-existent test. N/A for cases like this would be more accurate.