Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles is the skepticism surrounding the effectiveness of "liquid masks" as a substitute for traditional masks, highlighting the lack of clinical validation and potential health risks associated with their use [1][2]. Group 2 - "Liquid masks" have gained popularity on e-commerce platforms, with some products selling over 1 million bottles annually, claiming to provide a 99.9% blockage rate against viruses [1]. - Experts emphasize that "liquid masks" have not undergone clinical trials, and their protective effects are not supported by research data, making their efficacy questionable in real-world scenarios [1][2]. - Unlike traditional surgical masks, which have clear technical standards and mechanisms for blocking pathogens, "liquid masks" are classified as consumer products and may contain exaggerated claims regarding their virus-blocking capabilities [2].

Core Viewpoint - The rise of "liquid masks" as a nasal spray product is linked to the recent outbreak of influenza, attracting consumers looking for alternatives to traditional masks, despite concerns about its efficacy and potential misleading claims [1][2]. Group 1: Product Description and Popularity - "Liquid masks" are marketed as a nasal spray that creates a "physical barrier" to block viruses, claiming a "99.9% blockage rate" and promoting a slogan of "everyone can take off their masks" [1]. - The product has gained popularity on e-commerce platforms, with some brands reportedly selling over 1 million bottles annually, appealing to consumers who find traditional masks uncomfortable or unattractive [1][2]. Group 2: Expert Opinions on Efficacy - Experts express skepticism about the claims made by "liquid masks," emphasizing that they do not replace traditional masks, which have established scientific backing and effectiveness in reducing virus transmission [3][4]. - The current market offerings of "liquid masks" are classified as everyday consumer products rather than medical devices, lacking large-scale clinical validation [2][4]. Group 3: Limitations and Concerns - The protective effect of "liquid masks" is considered limited, as they may not effectively filter out aerosolized viruses smaller than 0.1 microns, and their safety and long-term effects on respiratory health remain unassessed [5][6]. - Some experts highlight that while the gel in "liquid masks" can theoretically capture some viruses, the actual effectiveness is highly dependent on application technique and does not account for oral transmission of viruses [6].