certain outcomes based on different state orders -- not comparing actual transmission or anything like viral loads across known differences in actual mask USE. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

In a world with so many variables and so much we don't know about every mechanism of this (and many) virus, here are a couple of the things we so seem to actually know: This virus can and does pass through aerosol transmission and respiratory channels, and wearing a mask helps filter both your aerosol intake and outputs, to various degrees --- never perfectly, but to some proven extent based on material, are you yelling, etc

How on earth can wearing a mask not be to some degree a helpful factor? I am open to some argument you want to make about this, but I have no idea what that may be -- unless you want to argue we have it all wrong and maybe this virus really does not shed in any way through aerosol/respiratory channels. One can still argue all day long about other aspects (to what extent it should be a legal requirement, what crosses some line, enforceability issues, etc), but what really is the argument that wearing a mask is not a smart, scicnce/logic based measure? There is virtually no way to perform a perfect scientific test of exactly how effective a mask may be in every circumstance, but it has a demonstrable effect on aerosol projection and intake, so what more does one really need to know to accept that it is a helpful and important measure?


[Post edited by fishhoo at 12/02/2020 10:06PM]