Obviously a lot of this argument is really born out of being stuck in online covid feedback loops but no-one wears a mask for 8 hours straight in any profession without suffering consequences, cloth or not. I know I have gone through this in this thread before but-
FFP3 use- unless you're using a powered respirator- is recommended for less than an hour at a time, max. That's even with a face fit medical test. Powered respirators can go a lot longer but it's not an enjoyable experience from a comfort perspective. You will also see the idea that a disposable ffp3 is the same as a face-fitted reusable filter mask, but that's only at the point of first usage, and protection will downgrade during a day of decent usage with a disposable.
FFP2 use can be longer, as your protection filter is less (10x allegedly, as opposed to 20x for an FFP3), but exertion tests have consistently shown that an FFP2 will result in increased breathing resistance, especially during stress and continual exercise etc. The yanks (and people who regurgitate their points online) will refer to these lads as N95s of course.
The bullshit category of cloth/surgical masks are too variable to talk about properly really as there's no real grading to it, but if you are talking about a genuine FFP1 then you've got a 4x reduction factor? So the idea of exercising with a non-filtered surgical mask on would reduce your coverage, there's no question about it.
If you're in poor shape and walking is a perceived exertion then you will struggle with airflow even in ffp1. Shitty cloth masks less so, perhaps, but it would still be there. The idea that someone would have a "paper" that disproves that idea is ludicrous, though we are now talking about fitness and health here. Most tests are undertaken on healthy specimens
This is where the lanyard situation comes in, there are people who genuinely struggle, but you have to argue the idea of whether you should be out and about at all in this scenario.
You can get into personal semantics about this but masks and their protection factors are real quantifiable science and it has been an active component of construction risk assessments for years.
I would say that anyone with knowledge of respiratory fibres or science wouldn't really need to refer to "new" studies because its just the same old scenarios that have always existed. Proven science! These filter categories exist for a reason, it's nothing new. Go look at HSG53 or something