Respond to this discussion post in 5-7 sentences in a positive way I believe that the policy for Face Masks, Barrier Fac
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2022 9:49 am
Respond to this discussion post in 5-7 sentences in a
positive way
I believe that the policy for Face Masks, Barrier Face
Coverings, Face Shields, Surgical Masks, and Respirators is
reasonable under the current pandemic. While there are obviously
risks associated in high risk professions, health care
professionals working in the ICU for example, this was put in place
so that these professionals had access to the highly regulated
already approved devices while others with a lower risk could
utilize something under an Emergency Use Authorization. The FDA had
to respond to ensure we had access to enough devices so that the
health care professionals could be protected. This was certainly a
demonstration of how the benefits outweighed the risks of people
potentially not having access to any sort of facial covering. I
think the guidelines that were required for face masks approved
under the EUA were very reasonable as well. They were required to
be labelled properly and with all materials identified, it could
not include any drugs, biologics, or nanoparticles, if it was
non-NIOSH-approved it had to be clearly identified as so, it
required warnings on the labelling, and that it must be labelled
that they are not intended for any use that would create an undue
risk during the pandemic1. As the devices moved up in
classes additional requirements were that they met certain
standards for filtration and airflow resistance which I feel was
also acceptable. I believe the FDA really took main aspects with
regards to safety of what is usually required for devices and
eliminated some of the more tedious items. They really ensured the
materials were to be safe, labelling was present so that the user
was informed, and that they met certain standards for filtration
and airflow to ensure they were able to adequately protect the user
as they were intended to.
I believe that the policy for Face Masks, Barrier Face
Coverings, Face Shields, Surgical Masks, and Respirators is
reasonable under the current pandemic. While there are obviously
risks associated in high risk professions, health care
professionals working in the ICU for example, this was put in place
so that these professionals had access to the highly regulated
already approved devices while others with a lower risk could
utilize something under an Emergency Use Authorization. The FDA had
to respond to ensure we had access to enough devices so that the
health care professionals could be protected. This was certainly a
demonstration of how the benefits outweighed the risks of people
potentially not having access to any sort of facial covering. I
think the guidelines that were required for face masks approved
under the EUA were very reasonable as well. They were required to
be labelled properly and with all materials identified, it could
not include any drugs, biologics, or nanoparticles, if it was
non-NIOSH-approved it had to be clearly identified as so, it
required warnings on the labelling, and that it must be labelled
that they are not intended for any use that would create an undue
risk during the pandemic1. As the devices moved up in classes
additional requirements were that they met certain standards for
filtration and airflow resistance which I feel was also acceptable.
I believe the FDA really took main aspects with regards to safety
of what is usually required for devices and eliminated some of the
more tedious items. They really ensured the materials were to be
safe, labelling was present so that the user was informed, and that
they met certain standards for filtration and airflow to ensure
they were able to adequately protect the user as they were intended
to.
positive way
I believe that the policy for Face Masks, Barrier Face
Coverings, Face Shields, Surgical Masks, and Respirators is
reasonable under the current pandemic. While there are obviously
risks associated in high risk professions, health care
professionals working in the ICU for example, this was put in place
so that these professionals had access to the highly regulated
already approved devices while others with a lower risk could
utilize something under an Emergency Use Authorization. The FDA had
to respond to ensure we had access to enough devices so that the
health care professionals could be protected. This was certainly a
demonstration of how the benefits outweighed the risks of people
potentially not having access to any sort of facial covering. I
think the guidelines that were required for face masks approved
under the EUA were very reasonable as well. They were required to
be labelled properly and with all materials identified, it could
not include any drugs, biologics, or nanoparticles, if it was
non-NIOSH-approved it had to be clearly identified as so, it
required warnings on the labelling, and that it must be labelled
that they are not intended for any use that would create an undue
risk during the pandemic1. As the devices moved up in
classes additional requirements were that they met certain
standards for filtration and airflow resistance which I feel was
also acceptable. I believe the FDA really took main aspects with
regards to safety of what is usually required for devices and
eliminated some of the more tedious items. They really ensured the
materials were to be safe, labelling was present so that the user
was informed, and that they met certain standards for filtration
and airflow to ensure they were able to adequately protect the user
as they were intended to.
I believe that the policy for Face Masks, Barrier Face
Coverings, Face Shields, Surgical Masks, and Respirators is
reasonable under the current pandemic. While there are obviously
risks associated in high risk professions, health care
professionals working in the ICU for example, this was put in place
so that these professionals had access to the highly regulated
already approved devices while others with a lower risk could
utilize something under an Emergency Use Authorization. The FDA had
to respond to ensure we had access to enough devices so that the
health care professionals could be protected. This was certainly a
demonstration of how the benefits outweighed the risks of people
potentially not having access to any sort of facial covering. I
think the guidelines that were required for face masks approved
under the EUA were very reasonable as well. They were required to
be labelled properly and with all materials identified, it could
not include any drugs, biologics, or nanoparticles, if it was
non-NIOSH-approved it had to be clearly identified as so, it
required warnings on the labelling, and that it must be labelled
that they are not intended for any use that would create an undue
risk during the pandemic1. As the devices moved up in classes
additional requirements were that they met certain standards for
filtration and airflow resistance which I feel was also acceptable.
I believe the FDA really took main aspects with regards to safety
of what is usually required for devices and eliminated some of the
more tedious items. They really ensured the materials were to be
safe, labelling was present so that the user was informed, and that
they met certain standards for filtration and airflow to ensure
they were able to adequately protect the user as they were intended
to.