BC Snob wrote:
The reason I provided the published study is that is was more controlled in evaluating the benefits of masking; comparing the likelihood in onward transmission with vs without masking as opposed to statewide data "polluted" with and without mask use.
...of course tightly controlled mask efficacy research in a lab will show
under ideal lab conditions what a mask can "do". However, this is utterly useless / meaningless under REAL mask use in the wild!
Forget about ideal laboratory mask research (humans don't live in labs, supervised by PPE experts). An improperly fitted, sized, and recycled mask in the real world in the wild, is about as protective as a space suit with a pin hole in it. The only metric to look at is: ....in places with mandated by law mask wearing, what are the ongoing infection numbers? Why use masks AT ALL (outside of the hospital/health care environment) if these infection numbers are as high as unmandated/voluntary mask wearing jurisdictions?
Global vaccination mandates:
....global vaccination mandates in my context means what jurisdictions around the Globe have mandated vaccination (NOT a single supra-national enforcement agency). Mandates have to be investigated country by country. Other than some war-torn African and Middle Eastern nations, can you name a SINGLE country where there has been zero vaccination mandate? Jeez, even places like Slovenia, had some form of Covid vaccination mandate. Some countries were "soft" on enforcement, like Belgium (for cultural reasons)...others brutally strict, like Canada (locking their citizens down in house arrest: the severity driven by Provincial rules).
