Wired was one of the publications that did an interesting article about this: https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwu...
I mean seriously, this is how science works and how guidance based on science works. We go wit the best answer we have at the time and continue to search for better answers.
Well that doesn't help much with the trust issue. What else turns out to be bad information? Sometimes the line between lies and (intentional or not) bullshit is quite fine.
One thing I've observed since the start of the pandemic is that information and recommendations are constantly changing, and there's overreaction as well as underreaction. Also late reaction rather than preparedness. Sometimes excessive preparedness (see also overreaction), sometimes too little.
It don't find it surprising in the slightest that people end up not trusting the chaotic system.
It turned out that the virus was transmissible via the air, but it was not airborne, it traveled via much larger respiratory droplets. Ordinary surgical masks were effective at stopping the spread of those droplets.
That's interesting - and must be a hospital issue. My hospital never made such a claim. They were simply upfront with their reason: There was a shortage of masks, and they were being reserved for those who needed to treat COVID-19 patients.
I keep hearing people say this as if saying it enough makes it true (thanks, Stalin), but I don't remember ever hearing it, honestly.
Do you have any footage of this? If it was as widespread as claimed, it should be easy to find.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200130/Do-masks-protect-...
They were saying not to buy masks in order to preserve them for healthcare workers. There was already a severe shortage of them.
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-warns-save-respirator-masks-for-h...