they used random cloth ones and the surgical looking ones. The
While not as good as a properly fitted N95, they are still more effective than no mask at reducing the spread of airborne particles from the wearer.
Remember that masks were always mostly about protecting others, not so much about protecting the wearer. And I think that’s where the loudest resistance came from - selfish people who don’t give a fuck about the wellbeing of other people.
Great, can you quantify how effective they were? So the issue is that if almost all infection happened not in public and cloth masks are marginally useful, what the point of wearing them in public if there is no measurable benefit?
While not as good as a properly fitted N95, they are still more effective than no mask at reducing the spread of airborne particles from the wearer.
Remember that masks were always mostly about protecting others, not so much about protecting the wearer. And I think that’s where the loudest resistance came from - selfish people who don’t give a fuck about the wellbeing of other people.
Great, can you quantify how effective they were? So the issue is that if almost all infection happened not in public and cloth masks are marginally useful, what the point of wearing them in public if there is no measurable benefit?
Imagine still trying to start mask debates in 2024.
And yet here you are…
If you don’t know the difference between starting a debate and pointing out the ridiculousness of the topic then I guess that explains the obsession.
You read this far so… I think you seem to care
I think trying to start mask debates in 2024 is ridiculous, but I’m sure I’ve said that already.
Yes, but the wearer has it on their chin.
The theoretical effectiveness of masks used in best practice and the actual effectiveness of actual practices are often miles apart.
I’m not anti-mask at all but from a public policy perspective the overall effect was meh.