DNW Protective Mask GB2626-2006 (Civil Grade)

Overall Result

NA Icon


NA Icon


NA Icon


Click here to learn more about our full testing methodology.

Why did this mask fail?


Video Transcript All right, everyone. Welcome back where we are testing your masks that you send to me. That's right. We tested all the masks on Amazon, but there are more masks out there in the world. So send them to me and I will test them. So this one comes from Peter. Peter, thank you.

Priority mail too. Thanks for spending the extra bucks. Peter's sending me a DNW protective mask. I'm actually going to read a part of his letter here. He said, hey Lloyd, my mom bought these masks from some vendor at a local strip mall somewhere in Southern California, about a month or two after they locked down.

She never told me how much she paid for them. I can only imagine it was a lot. It seems this manufacturer is adept in making alphabet soup with all of the standards and agency marks printed on the packaging in hopes that some unsuspecting soul would buy it. The only thing I'd bet my life on with this mask was to filter the wildfire smoke that Washington was engulfed in during the summer of 2020. This is very dramatically written. I didn't expect this to happen before I started reading. I have enclosed two of these masks for you and [Arossio 00:01:20] to test and try on. It'd be great to see the test results on YouTube. I ask only that you use my first name. You got it, Peter. All right, Peter, thank you for the masks.

Don't worry, I won't reveal your true identity. All right. So he sent me two of these, which is awesome. I appreciate they came in the original packaging. If you're going to send me masks, send me the whole box or send me the original packaging if you can. That is ideal. He's talking about the alphabet soup on here, all of these different things. KN95 approved, FDA, CE, all these different words. So I'll explain some of these. So the GB2626, where they said civil grade, they added that, this is actually the KN95 standard. Anytime you see GB in front of a standard, a medical standard, it's going to mean China. This is a Chinese standard, and this is the KN95 standard. I am suspicious that this is a KN95 for a couple of reasons. Number one is it says KN95 on it, but typically most true KN95s also say that, just like an N95 has to say NIOSH and N95 on it, most KN95s also have the standard written on it.

This GB2626, it's usually on this as well. And I don't see that on there. So that makes me pretty suspicious. Typically, they also put the company name on here as well. I think that's a part of the standard, but you can correct me if I'm wrong. Since I don't see any of those things, I actually think this might be a fake. That doesn't mean it won't test well, but I think it might be a fake. I'm going to switch to this one so I can see it. Another thing on here, FDA. This isn't real, for a couple of reasons. Number one, the FDA does not allow you to put their logo on packaging because it looks like they're endorsing it. So you can't say, you can say that you're an FDA approved manufacturer, or if you're an FDA approved device, you can say that. But masks aren't FDA approved, they're cleared.

So it would never say that. Also they're using the old FDA logo. So someone, when they were making their little layout, made a mistake and they pulled the old FDA logo. Although I will agree with the forger in this case, I kind of like the old FDA logo. The new one looks a lot different. And so this is probably a fake. CE, by the way, if you basically file a couple pieces of paperwork, you could put CE. It's a European standard, but it doesn't mean much when it comes to masks. And then this is a European testing standard for FFRs, which maybe they passed, but I'm starting to wonder. I am going to agree with Peter here that this is alphabet soup. I also, it says this mask is used to prevent non oily suspended particles, filtration efficiency at 95%, it's making that claim.

That's exactly what we're going to test here. And I was able to find a couple places online that had this. And again, it looks exactly like this, and they're not putting that GB2626, lends me to believe that it's probably a fake. Also, bad reviews here. So I don't know. We'll see. And just because this is a fake, actually it doesn't mean that it won't protect you to 95%. And Peter, you were right because almost any disposable mask is going to protect you against the particulates in a forest fire just because they're very, very large compared to COVID. They're about 20 times larger than something like COVID. Just talking about the construction a little bit, it actually seems pretty good. This aluminum strap is really nice, that's really strong. Oh man, it broke. Oh but look at that, got a hole in it. It shouldn't have broke like that though. I don't like that. That's lame. Especially since I only have two and I want to try it on, that makes it harder. So I'll just try it on like this.

No smell. Wait, actually it kind of smells like fresh cotton. Hmm. It's kind of a delightful smell if you will. So it's not bad, not bad smell. Construction obviously could be better. I don't have a whole box of them to do that too, so I only got the one. Let's test it, see what happens. Now the clamp I'm using is a little bit different. This is specifically made for a KN95. And so it's going to fit just a little bit different than what we've been using. If you try to put a KN95 in our other device, it just doesn't work as well. I'm going to make sure that this lines up correctly. Here we go. Got a good seal there. Let's go ahead and let it rip. This is a particulate filtration efficiency machine, it's made to test to the ASTM standards, but a KN95 should, a good one that's built to the Chinese standard of the 2626, would blow it out of the water. So we'll see what it's going to do.
I like that they're individually packaged. The packaging is really nice. So this thing's spooling up. Actually, an independent lab in the United States tested a bunch of KN95s that came in, over 200, and found that 70% of them didn't meet standards. 70%. I'll try to find that article and put a link here. Also, our own CDC tested, I think 340 KN95s that were in circulation and found that 33% of them were below standards. So the KN95 format is not a great brand in the United States now, just because so many fakes came in.

And I was yapping and not looking, we got another one here. Peter, you were right. 44% , that can't even have melt blown in it at that level. That's worse than a cloth mask in many cases. This is a really bad mask. You were right to not trust it. Yeah, this is really bad, and it's going down. It started at 44, now it's going down. Now the airflow resistance is 110,111. What's crazy about that is that our masks, our surgical masks here, test at 110 and have a 99% efficiency. Now, typically there's an inverse correlation between the more breathable it is, the less amount of filtration. And in this case, the filtration's really bad and the breathability is actually not great either. So that's kind of interesting to see.

All right, test is almost finishing up here, be over in just a few seconds. We just recently bumped it up to 130 to give it a little bit of extra time. But yeah, we're already down under 40%, which is really, really terrible. Anything with any real melt blown in it should test better than this. And in fact, I'm so curious, I want to cut this guy up and see what's in the middle. So there you go. I'm going to actually write it down, 37.382. Wow. That is bad. well, good job, Peter.

Good eye, good catching it. And thank you so much for sending that in. If anybody else has more they'd like me to test, I would be happy to. I know, the pandemic's over, but I paid for all this machinery, I might as well test it, right? All right. If this was enjoyable for you, please like and subscribe. I know that you don't use YouTube that much. You're not going to look at this again. It's fine. Noone's checking. Noone's checking to see if you use the subscriptions. I'll catch you next time. Bye.


The DNW Protective Mask GB2626-2006 (Civil Grade) failed because it wildly missed the filtration requirement (95%). The KN95 standard also requires that the mask have the manufacturer’s name and the appropriate technical standard, typically either "GB 2626-2019" or GB-2626-2006,” written across the front of the mask. This is similar to how official N95 masks display NIOSH approval numbers. This mask did not have the required identification on its front. 

Mask Construction

Mask Smell



Product Name


Country of Origin


Strap Type






Test Source

Registration Number

Buy Mask

Leave a comment