Could someone please tell me if these alternatives can also protect one against being infected by COVID-19 virus, when being outside (in grocery stores, markets, etc)?

If yes, how much of protection will they provide?

A professional face-mask-respirator can give us 99.97% of protection, what percentage can give us the other alternatives like the ones shown below?

  1. enter image description here

  2. enter image description here

  3. enter image description here

Or if you know about other alternatives to protect oneself from getting infected when being outside, please share them.

Thanks in advance

  • Possible alternative for a mask, given that there are not Nwhathever masks anymore: skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/47408/… ? or maybe more counterproductive than productive though Apr 20, 2020 at 20:21
  • 1
    Hah, gotta say that Design (1) above is clever! A lot of problems with masks come from improper fitting/leakage in connection to the face; if folks weren't concerned with fashion and could simply wear astronaut-like whole-head coverings, the issue'd seem a lot simpler. Doubly so if an active filter (i.e., one that has its own power-source) could be used, as the additional breathing difficulty that can come from good filters can motivate folks to intentionally reduce the seal (whether partially, through an improper fit, or fully, by simply not wearing the filter).
    – Nat
    Apr 21, 2020 at 3:33
  • 1
    Misc. links: 1; 2; 3; 4.
    – Nat
    Apr 21, 2020 at 4:00
  • @NatThank you. Indeed, the best would be an astronaut-like suit.. Apr 21, 2020 at 15:55

1 Answer 1


Those are face shields to prevent primarily droplets reaching the eyes, and are worn as being more comfortable than goggles to protect the mucous membranes of the eyes, and they don't fog up like goggles can. However, they don't protect against droplet nuclei which float in the air, and there is no regulated design.

Face shields are PPE that are commonly used as barrier protection for infection control purposes by numerous workers. There currently is no standard regarding face/eye protection from biological hazards and this deficit needs to be remedied as quickly as possible. Due to the lack of a good facial seal peripherally that can allow for aerosol penetration, face shields should not be used as solitary face/eye protection, but rather as adjunctive to other PPE (protective facemasks, goggles, etc.). Given the dearth of available data regarding the appropriate use of face shields for infection control, scientifically sound research needs to be conducted on the use of this form of PPE.


  • Thank you for your answer. Apr 19, 2020 at 22:43
  • I am thinking then, perhaps an N100 mask + goggles would be enough protection to not be infected, am I correct? Apr 19, 2020 at 22:45
  • 1
    N95 is fine. If in an ICU N95 may be okay there too but PAPR better. Apr 19, 2020 at 23:18
  • It's important to note here that every N95/99/100 mask used by non-healthcare providers is a mask those providers who need them won't have. Just don't. Wash your hands, avoid touching mucous membranes, and wear a cheap, homemade mask to avoid infecting others.
    – Carey Gregory
    Apr 19, 2020 at 23:26
  • 1
    Depends on where you are. Plenty of N95 masks in the chemists here. Hardly anyone wears a mask. Apr 19, 2020 at 23:27

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.