Hmmm, it's not that simple. The thing with RPE (respiratory protective equipment) is that without a decent face-fit, even an FFP3 won't do much good. There's a whole thing about correct handling, donning, removal and maintenance of RPE which is essential if it is to do it's job. (I get sooooo annoyed when you see something like BBC Repair Shop presenters using a dusk mask to "protect" whilst spraying paint and not wearing it correctly, may as well not wear it at all).
As someone who in my professional life has had to specify RPE for hazardous substances of various types (in line with HSE guidance) and check efficacy, I found the whole COVID "mask" arguments rather disingenuous.
For quite some time, we have known that the only way to properly protect workers from (say) silica dust is to provide air-fed hoods. If an employer gave them surgical masks instead (or even FFP3 for anything more than brief and sporadic exposure) they would have been in deep doo-doo with the HSE. Silica dust particles are a magnitude bigger that viruses....... [and so the real PPE scandal IMO is the lack of air-fed RPE for front-line NHS staff].
Surgical masks might (if used correctly) help reduce spreading of contaminated snot, but that's about all.
The thing with FFP3-type filtering facepieces is, that if worn correctly (i.e. effective) they can be quite hard to breathe/work in, which is why air-fed or powered filtering respirators are used where protection is done properly, the user needs to work physically and the RPE needs to be worn for more than a short time.
Perhaps another lesson is that we had previously forgotten as a society how to deal with serous illness and convalescence...... and failed to learn from other world countries (e.g. South Africa) with more experience about how to handle illness and recovery.
GC