fresh air

[pacman76]

i'm posting here because i think this is considered a safety issue...

does anybody have any recommendations eaither way about the pollution masks. www.respro.com has a lot of differnt products, and i'm out there in the streets alllllllllll day long. i'm not trying to get all sick and cancerous n' stuff. do they work? are some better than others? does it get costly? do you just wear them on some days and not others. my town is a pretty windy place, so i think the pollution gets blown through pretty well. just, some days i feel like i'm bathing in it?

i would just love any info from people who both love and hate them, and have used them in different ways. i don't have money to throw around, so i want to be an educated buyer...

[randya]

Not sure of the various models, but the cartridge or filter you choose is usually important. For cycling in traffic it should be able to filter small particulates (e.g. from diesel exhaust), that would be a HEPA filter, and also hydrocarbons, that would probably be a GAC filter. Unless you're concerned about fashion, I would try shopping an industrial safety supplier, rather than a bike shop, you'll probably get a better deal.

[markhr]

I used the techno for commuting. The techno, sportsta and city are all very similar. The valves on the sportsta possibly work a little better.

I did find as long as the weather was dry the mask worked fine if breathing felt a little restricted. Once it rained and/or the mask got wet it became a like chinese water torture as I'd have to deeper gasping breaths to suck air through.

No, I don't use one anymore because of this(sunny sunny london) but I am still worried about all the pollution. If you can guarantee a dry mask for each ride then stick with one mask. If not, use a couple so you have a dry mask for each direction.

[pacman76]

my understanding when it's raining, pollution counts tend to drop too. does that mean i wouldn't need one so much in the rain. like, maybe i wouldn't need one every day, just days when the reports say it's going to be hot stagnant smoggy air. then again, i do tail buses all day, so when isn't it that...

[Cyclaholic]

my understanding when it's raining, pollution counts tend to drop too. does that mean i wouldn't need one so much in the rain. like, maybe i wouldn't need one every day, just days when the reports say it's going to be hot stagnant smoggy air. then again, i do tail buses all day, so when isn't it that...

I've been looking into this as well because I have the same concerns as you, thanks for starting the thread. I was looking at the techno mask on that site as it seems to be the right sort of filtering for city commuting in peak hour.

I think you're right, during/after a bit of rain you'll find that the pollution gets literally washed out of the air so we could possibly get away without the mask.

[pacman76]

I think you're right, during/after a bit of rain you'll find that the pollution gets literally washed out of the air so we could possibly get away without the mask.

which would mean we wouldn't have to deal with soggy filters... just take it off during a shower and for a little bit after. i would still love to hear from people who have used different models and either loved or hated them. but i think i might be sold. plus, i go to a very dirtyy indoor rock climbing gym and all the chalk dust in the air... i might get a lot of use out of that thing...

[atbman]

Then you'd need to wear one in a car as pollution levels inside are 3 to 4 times higher than at cyclists nostril height. (World Health Organisation survey across the developed world)

[pacman76]

well, i tend to travel by bike or bus anyhow. but i'm a little confused... does that mean you don't htink the mask is necessary? even if you're riding in the city all day? and the city i ride in happend to be in a valley so the pollution just sits there there and doesn't get blown out very well. anyhow... was that just a bit of FYI or were you intimating you don't think masks are a necesary idea. if so, i'd love more input.

[atbman]

The conclusion I drew from the WHO study was that I should wear a mask inside the car.

As for it protecting you against pollution, I believe that they are ineffective against diesel particles (Q10 is the technical term) because of their very small size.

I also hypothesise that, since according to another study (no reference, I'm afraid) levels of carbon monoxide are lower in cyclists' bloodstreams than in drivers, cyclists lung activity possibly clears other pollutants from the blood, tho' not necessarily from the lung surface.

If you live in LA, it probably makes no difference in any case. I recall reading, many years ago, of a pathologists report on a Jane Doe murder victim that "she had only been in LA for a few months, as signs of lung damage were minimal"

Bon Voyage

[pacman76]

The conclusion I drew from the WHO study was that I should wear a mask inside the car.

As for it protecting you against pollution, I believe that they are ineffective against diesel particles (Q10 is the technical term) because of their very small size.

I also hypothesise that, since according to another study (no reference, I'm afraid) levels of carbon monoxide are lower in cyclists' bloodstreams than in drivers, cyclists lung activity possibly clears other pollutants from the blood, tho' not necessarily from the lung surface.

If you live in LA, it probably makes no difference in any case. I recall reading, many years ago, of a pathologists report on a Jane Doe murder victim that "she had only been in LA for a few months, as signs of lung damage were minimal"

Bon Voyage

egad! none of that sounds good at all. someday i hope to live in a more natural place. in the meantime, no... it’s not LA. i live in cleveland, which has lots of wonderful medical anomalies that are attributed to the strange chemicals we have floating around (including an abnormally high rate of MS occurrences). if you go here http://www.respro.com/industrial.php and click on the tiny box that says "read on" it provites list of pollutants that are filtered out by their masks.

the types of chemicals in cleveland's air, other than regular traffic, tend to sulfur compounds and... well... Lord knows what else considering all the steel and chemical processing around here.

it looks as if some pretty small particles are handled at least at a "moderate" level by these things. do you think that any little bit would help, especially if i'm being exposed all day? i mean... wouldn't even a 20% decrease of certain things be better than a 0% decrease? or would that not matter? i'm all anatomy and body mechanics... i don't know much of anything about toxic activity in the body, so you seem to be a good resource. do you really think i should take a “screw it” approach? do i understand you right?

you suggested that the pollutants might remain on the surface of the lungs... so what about limiting their ability to get there? you don't think it might help to wear a mask for that reason. i'd be curious if you have a sec to check the ratings of the flitration power of the masks through that link above and i'd like to get your input. i mean, i see the point in that why not wear it all the time. but the only time i'm really deep in the filth is when i work and i'm huffing and puffing that fine cleveland vintage air. the rest of the time i'm in a very tree-heavy suburb. and then my breathing isn't as hard or deep.

[atbman]

Hi Pacman - I may have inadvertently given you the impression that I've got some specialist knowledge on this subject. Since where I live is a largely post-industrial conurbation, levels of pollution are probably much lower than they've been since the beginning of the UK North's Industrial Revolution, so I see no reason to wear a mask.

From what little I know of US industrial history, it may be that Cleveland has air quality poor enough to justify mask wearing. It's possible that one of the local universities has some expertise in this and could provide more technically qualified advice than a typically opinionated contributor to these pages like me.

[scarry]

I'd be more worried about mecury exposure, for example from dentil amalgam fillings.
If you have any amalgam fillings you are getting a dose of mercury vapor every time you breath, especilly after chewing.
http://www.generationrescue.org/mercury_dental.html

I think as a cyclist, my high resperation and metabalism help eliminate toxins faster from my body.
I'd be more worried about getting hit by a car.

[pacman76]

I'd be more worried about mecury exposure, for example from dentil amalgam fillings.

i never had a cavity until after the common use of the white fillings, so i managed to avoid the grossness of mercury fillings. i'm even shocked to think they still use that. but, back to masks...


I'd be more worried about getting hit by a car.

fair enough. we can probably find this idea posing as a dead horse being beaten some more in the helmet threads. :D i just suppose that i'm still not convinced that there is not higher pollutant risk to a person like myself who rides a whole lot in the city. for example., i ride up to 50 hours a week in the middle of very heavy traffic, industrial pollution, construction, in a notoriously high-filth, rust-belt city... higher metabolism or not i still don't want that in me. i believe there is a risk there... i'm just curious if the masks are effective at all, in any capacity, against it.

[pacman76]

It's possible that one of the local universities has some expertise in this and could provide more technically qualified advice than a typically opinionated contributor to these pages like me.

that is a badass idea... i never even thought of that. there are reseaech facilities all over this area - both on campuses and as public companies. great thought! thanks!