How Much Mask-Wearing Do We Need?

Just how much mask-wearing do we need? That depends on how good our masks are. If they’re highly efficient, we can get by with fewer people wearing masks. If they’re not so great, we need a lot more people wearing them. Alan Kot has deployed a vast flotilla of Greek letters to come up with a theoretical model that produces this chart:

Each of these curves represents a disease with a particular value of R0 and shows what it would take to get R0 down to 1.0. COVID-19, for example, has an R0 of about 2.5, so take a look at that curve. On the bottom right, it shows that you can get this down to 1.0 with 100 percent of the population wearing masks that are about 35 percent efficient. At the top of the curve, you can achieve the same result with 60 percent of the population wearing masks that are 100 percent efficient. Anyplace else along the curve also works.

Fine. So how efficient are the cloth masks that we’re all wearing these days? I’m glad you asked:

The obvious problem with some of these is that, efficient or not, you’d barely be able to breathe through them. But how about silk or chiffon? They look to be about 50-60 percent efficient and are probably breathable. If we could get 80 percent adoption of masks like this, Kot says, that would be enough to get R0 below one and extinguish the the pandemic entirely.

Wear a mask! With the exception of 80 thread-per-inch quilter’s cotton, they’re all effective enough to make a difference.

UPDATE: I originally misinterpreted Kot’s chart. It’s corrected now.

Thank you!

We didn't know what to expect when we told you we needed to raise $400,000 before our fiscal year closed on June 30, and we're thrilled to report that our incredible community of readers contributed some $415,000 to help us keep charging as hard as we can during this crazy year.

You just sent an incredible message: that quality journalism doesn't have to answer to advertisers, billionaires, or hedge funds; that newsrooms can eke out an existence thanks primarily to the generosity of its readers. That's so powerful. Especially during what's been called a "media extinction event" when those looking to make a profit from the news pull back, the Mother Jones community steps in.

The months and years ahead won't be easy. Far from it. But there's no one we'd rather face the big challenges with than you, our committed and passionate readers, and our team of fearless reporters who show up every day.

Thank you!

We didn't know what to expect when we told you we needed to raise $400,000 before our fiscal year closed on June 30, and we're thrilled to report that our incredible community of readers contributed some $415,000 to help us keep charging as hard as we can during this crazy year.

You just sent an incredible message: that quality journalism doesn't have to answer to advertisers, billionaires, or hedge funds; that newsrooms can eke out an existence thanks primarily to the generosity of its readers. That's so powerful. Especially during what's been called a "media extinction event" when those looking to make a profit from the news pull back, the Mother Jones community steps in.

The months and years ahead won't be easy. Far from it. But there's no one we'd rather face the big challenges with than you, our committed and passionate readers, and our team of fearless reporters who show up every day.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate