[Izkata]

> The recommendation changed (pretty quickly, based on stronger evidence of aerosol transmission and

This is not only backwards, it is hilariously so: Aerosol transmission was only partially accepted a year or more after the mask push. People still resist it even now. The whole reason masks were supposed to work was the assumption that it was entirely droplet transmission.

The people who believed it was aerosol spread that first year were the ones against masking, because the virus is too small to be stopped by cloth masks.

[notahacker]

Funny that, because I can find references to likely aerosol transmission and the assumption that cloth masks would reduce aerosol transmission to a small degree in the early 2020 minutes of the body that later recommended mask mandates (on the basis reducing stuff to a small degree is important when reducing pandemic spread...) in my country

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Not all aerosol particles are the same size, and particles don't have to be smaller than holes they pass through for a grid of fibre to obstruct a significant proportion of them. The change in guidance wasn't a conclusion masks were a panacea, they were a reflection that even a small degree of protection was better than no protection in a situation where existing measures weren't slowing its spread fast enough.

The people who were against masking on principle by and large didn't care what degree it reduced it by, because they just didn't want to be told to wear masks.