It pains me we almost can't have a real discussion about this topic without it being hijacked almost immediately.
I have thought deeply about this and I am not sure we can really have experimental evidence that isn't kind of meaningless. There are so many variables to control for and with the time aspect it seems non-ergodic.
We are not an intellectual enough society to have more than "mask don't work" or "Ipse dixit, science says masks work".
> Ironically, the CDC's guidance might result in two different scenarios: excessive mask use where it won't help and inadequate mask use in places where it might help.
Sounds like a prime opportunity to do an extensive randomized real world study of mask efficacy in the presence of an airborne transmissible disease.
I say let it play out; most everyone has already chosen their sides, and only time will bear out the results. Once it's "over", adjust for or further study what societal differences contributed or caused the results, if any.
It's never going to be over until we accept the virus is going to be with us forever and people will die that might have lived a bit longer without the virus. The lockdowns are doing more damage than slightly elevated death rates (especially in developing countries and to the young and poor).
I have thought deeply about this and I am not sure we can really have experimental evidence that isn't kind of meaningless. There are so many variables to control for and with the time aspect it seems non-ergodic.
We are not an intellectual enough society to have more than "mask don't work" or "Ipse dixit, science says masks work".