If you took a similar group of people doing similar things with similar distancing, but had them unmasked, and then followed both groups up to see what happened to their infection rates and that of their close contacts, that would give us evidence of how effective masks are. Two conditions the same except for one factor.
The problem with all the studies (but one, see below) on mask effectiveness is that they are “observational studies” where they are unable to separate out the different factors such as social distancing or hand washing. These are called “confounding factors” and they are acknowledged in most studies I’ve seen but rarely mentioned in the reports of those studies. And that’s not to account for the possible (likely?) “confirmation bias” in such observational studies.
There’s only one RCT of mask effectiveness — the Yale University study — which I’ve mentioned before, and even it is unable to separate out the confounding factors, as its authors acknowledged. (And which showed, at best, a 2% point decrease in transmission with strict mask wearing, but “no statistically significant effect” of cotton masks).
Looking at these people in the photo, laughing and playing outside, outdoors in a fresh northeasterly breeze, I can say — based on my study of studies — that they are gaining nothing by their wearing of masks. What they are doing is following government edicts. Should we say “good on them” for following the law? Or should we call out the law as an ass? For not following the science? For continuing to make people fearful? For leading us to a time when masks are a permanent part of our life? I shudder at that thought. At that grimness.
Forgive me - or not, I don’t care - for not liking a society where masks are an everyday thing. Visible - and risible - signs of “safetyism”. Blocking the faces of its most fervent acolytes.
