What you say (and others too) makes sense to me and I could well believe it true, but I'm NOT claiming that masks are useless unless you are infected, I'M ASKING IF ANYBODY KNOWS WHY EXPERTS ARE SAYING OTHERWISE (or whether I just heard an unluckily skewed sample)
Plus, I also asked for a citation to back up the poster's position, not common-sense arguments (which are a good starting point but not evidence in themselves).
The official position for many countries that are containing the virus suggests wearing a mask when out in public. One notable exception is Singapore.
Here is the Korean society of infection FAQ that says wearing a mask can reduce transmission:
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ko&tl=en&u=http%3A...
Oh, and you want citations, sorry, my bad:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4p... - 30 some citations on masks.
See my reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22701821 Mind, I just don't know if what I'm saying there holds water.
Citations are good, following up!
Given we know there are people with COVID-19 who are asymptomatic, any "Healthy people have no use for a mask" can simultaneously be true, and be practically irrelevant, as any definition of "healthy people" is necessarily impossible to prove. You simply can not know you are free of Corona Virus, short of having recovered from the virus.
If the standard was EVERYONE wears a mask, asymptomatic people would be a non-issue. Any advice contrary to the 100% mask usage argument has to explain how we deal with asymptomatic people. Short of testing everyone all the time, what would that even be?
TL;DR In a world with asymptomatic COVID-19 people, a 100% mask policy seems the sane default position.