Like I just said it's clear that masks stop particles. That part is obvious.

What's not clear is if applying a plague vector directly on your face with a virus that remains active on surfaces for days is efficacious.

Is it efficacious at the community level?

It's basic epidemiology. You could be more pro-science and consider these things.

Here's a study from the original SARS epidemic showing that people who had known contact with infected people there was a 70% lower chance of infection when they wore masks[1]. At this point, arguing that masks don't work is absolutely taking the piss -- you only need to look at countries like Japan (which made the political decision to not do widespread lockdowns unlike many other countries in Asia) to see that widespread mask usage clearly works.

> Supporting the validity of this finding, there was a dose-response effect: by multivariable analysis, persons who always wore masks had a 70% lower risk of being diagnosed with clinical SARS compared with those who never wore masks, and persons with intermittent mask use had a 60% lower risk. Many persons who wore masks in the community did not use N-95 or similar highly efficient filtration devices, which have been recommended for use in the hospital setting.

[1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3322931/

Did you read that study? Or did you just read the first paragraph summary? I'm seriously asking. Because if you read that study...which is a SURVEY of 100 or so people.. you would clearly not be using that as your bulletproof evidence that masks work.

Did you just read the title?

"""At this point, arguing that masks don't work is absolutely taking the piss""'

Fanatical beliefs with no evidence?

Is Corona a cult?

I look at countries like Sweden and Norway and know that masks mandates don't work.