[kypro]

Obviously they work. Washing your hands works. Not having face to face contact with other humans works. The issue I think most people have is whether the data supports various health mandates and whether in the long run they'll actually have any impact.

Even if the data is supports the claim that masks reduce spread, the data is less clear on if it's an effective means to combat a pandemic. Specifically, will masks limit the total number COVID cases given enough time, or just slow the time it takes for everyone in the population to be infected? An argument could be made that slowing spread gives time for vaccines and antivirals to be developed, in turn limiting cases and deaths, but this argument would then also depend on data and safety in regards to current / future vaccines and antivirals.

> The people who DON'T want to wear them and who wish to make it a political act will dredge up all sorts of B.S studies

I do get your annoyance here. I know a couple of people who don't just disagree with the concept of mask mandates, but also seem to be basing their opinion on some of the "B.S studies" you're referring to. I don't think this is the majority though. Most people just don't like being told what to do, especially when the benefits of mask mandates is probably quite negligible given they don't offer full protection, won't stop the pandemic, and the fact a lot (the majority?) of people will wear masks simply because they're recommended.

I guess I sort of see it as similar to drinking alcohol or eating doughnuts. The data is pretty clear these things are bad and causing people to die in huge numbers, but the bar at which the government should step in and say you must or can't do something should probably be quite high. And in the case of mask mandates their effectiveness depends massively on the mask itself and how the wearer is wearing and using it. I've been at the store and had people cough right next to me in thin fabric masks while mandates were in place. I'm not even sure an effective mask mandate is possible, they certainly haven't given me much more comfort. Were I more concerned about COVID I'd personally be avoiding social contact as much as possible regardless of mask mandates.

So yeah, masks work. People should wear them. I usually wear one in public. But the risk of COVID and their effectiveness doesn't justify mandating them imo.

[lexapro]

>Specifically, will masks limit the total number COVID cases given enough time, or just slow the time it takes for everyone in the population to be infected?

Slowing the spread in order to not overburden hospitals (which causes death & mayhem and affects not just COVID patients) was always _the_ reason why we wear masks and have lockdowns. It's about slowing the pandemic, not ending the pandemic (that's maybe what the vaccines can do).

So yes, masks have an impact, they saved countless lives already. And yes, people will continue to break the law, but that's not a good reason to abolish the law and accept many many deaths.

[yebyen]

> Most people just don't like being told what to do

Bingo. I live in a "blue part" of red Indiana and this is the conclusion I've come to as well. It's extremely frustrating knowing that masks work when everyone wears them, but you are basically powerless to make a change when 90% of the people around you don't wear a mask at all, and 9 of 10 remaining folks that do wear one aren't wearing it correctly. I imagine that most of my neighbors are good folks that want to do something to help, but you can't control the people around you.

If we could simply grant that "we don't like being told what to do" at the outset of the argument, I think we'd get a lot further in the national conversation. But "you can't tell me what to do" isn't a winning legal argument, so we get religious objections, and bogus "harm of the vaccine" studies with even more outrageous arguments, simply because those people who didn't like the idea of a mandate are smart enough to know they actually stand a chance in court with those arguments.