Small note on the methodology link: I thought it was a 404 dead link because when I opened it in a new tab it was a 404 (turns out it's a pop-up modal).
I don't think what's described in the methodology actually lines up with the result pages. In particular the methodology pop-up has sections about construction and smell, but I don't think I see them anywhere in the text of a particular mask review, i.e. it doesn't look like they're actually a part of what goes into a pass/fail score. Likewise there is a "Standard" field in the review that is pass/fail, but it's not explained in the methodology (I think this is basically a catch-all for "marketing fraud" where a manufacturer says something about their product that is just false?).
Nor is it described in the methodology what the pass/fail cutoff is.
But the sheer number of masks is definitely impressive.
I don't think what's described in the methodology actually lines up with the result pages. In particular the methodology pop-up has sections about construction and smell, but I don't think I see them anywhere in the text of a particular mask review, i.e. it doesn't look like they're actually a part of what goes into a pass/fail score. Likewise there is a "Standard" field in the review that is pass/fail, but it's not explained in the methodology (I think this is basically a catch-all for "marketing fraud" where a manufacturer says something about their product that is just false?).
Nor is it described in the methodology what the pass/fail cutoff is.
But the sheer number of masks is definitely impressive.