[basch]

droplets and airborne is a somewhat arbitrary distinction pulled out of .. thin air.

https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwu...

Whether the droplet/aerosol float through the air has to do with much more than particle size.

"There was just one literally tiny problem: “The physics of it is all wrong,” Marr says. That much seemed obvious to her from everything she knew about how things move through air. Reality is far messier, with particles much larger than 5 microns staying afloat and behaving like aerosols, depending on heat, humidity, and airspeed."

[ch4s3]

That's not my point at all. I didn't make the droplet vs airborne distinction.

I mean that the masks can and do stop some droplets and larger particles, but smaller particles pass through and around them readily. It seems like really small particles might be causing infections with newer variants. But I'm also not sure what we even know for sure about this at the moment. A lot of mask research has been don with modeling or lab setups to spray liquids through them. The narrower set of real world studies cast a lot of doubt on anything but N95s worn properly. So I'm not sure where that leaves us.

[basch]

That goes back to its not binary. Less viral load is less viral load. Masks are not a complete solution.

At the end of the day the goal appears to be to reduce spread and reinfection to minimize the load on the hospital system.

[ch4s3]

The question I have is, do masks actually lower viral load meaningfully if the individual viruses are being shed and blown through the mask? Put another way, particles large enough to be stopped by most masks may not be the primary vector of infection for new strains of COVID and we have no real clue.