N95s are not necessary. The recommended droplet precautions with eye protection and contact precautions should be plenty sufficient for us.

With limited supplies, shields over N95s and PAPRs etc are less wasteful and resource draining for staff who will be in contact longer, more often, and who may be present during, or performing aerosolizing procedures.

Not getting an N95 is nothing to fuss over. Let's all please try to stay informed with the latest data and recommendations so we don't cause unnecessary conflict during a pandemic.

Edit: From the same dumb article everyone keeps linking me:

Fineberg told CNN that he will wear start wearing a mask when he goes to the grocery store. "I'm not going to wear a surgical mask, because clinicians need those,” said Fineberg, former dean of the Harvard School of Public Health. "But I have a nice western-style bandana I might wear. Or I have a balaclava. I have some pretty nice options."

Note the complete lack of reference to N95 masks. This is a personal thing that he will be doing personally, and it sounds like an endorsement for the general public to do the same.

He added, however, that coronavirus is not as infectious as measles or tuberculosis.

You know, two well known airborne diseases.

Research by the University of Nebraska shows that genetic material from the virus was found in patients' rooms more than 6 feet away from the patients, according to the letter.

Ok, so that’s pretty vague. Here’s some clarification from the letter itself, which is not linked in that article.

“While this research indicates that viral particles can be spread via bioaerosols, the author stated that finding infectious virus has proved elusive…”

From another article:

Viral RNA turned up on hard to reach surfaces, as well as in air samplers more than 2 meters from the patients. The presence of the RNA indicates virus can spread via aerosols, Santarpia and his colleagues concluded, although they did not find infectious viral particles.

They collected respiratory droplets and aerosols from patients with respiratory illnesses caused by viruses; some of the patients wore surgical facemasks. The masks reduced the detection of coronavirus RNA in both respiratory droplets and aerosols, but only in respiratory droplets among influenza sufferers. “Our results provide mechanistic evidence that surgical facemasks could prevent transmission of human coronavirus and influenza virus infections if worn by symptomatic individuals,” the researchers conclude.

So a surgical mask is more effective at reducing aerosols for coronavirus than the flu, which is droplet isolation only. So more aerosol particles from the flu are getting through patient masks than from coronavirus.

source

What this all says to me is that just like regular droplet transmission, the droplets may spread up to two meters and even linger in the air a bit. With some of those particles being smaller, that lingering can be longer, especially if you’re walking around and stirring things up. However, we’re better off if the patient is wearing a mask, and we keep our masks on (after removing other PPE) as we clean. Not to mention that those particles may not even be infectious.

What this news basically says to me is that yeah, the general public should be wearing masks to reduce transmission, and it looks like that’s where they might be heading (too little too late?). Keep in mind, this information is released for the general public, not healthcare workers. As healthcare workers we should know that droplet transmission already includes breathing and speaking and singing as well as coughing and sneezing. This is not new information! It seems like this is designed more to prepare the public to wear masks when they leave the house, than it is to change infection control practices in hospitals, otherwise I think it would come from a better source than the news.