I really hated during the pandemic how people moralized the science. I don't mean to say the science was ambiguous. It largely was not. But the, "I believe science" memes were a deceptive appeal to find morality somewhere we shouldn't. The moral position for wearing masks was not dependent on the certainty that they work. It depended on a willingness to subdue one's own will for the good of all.
I'm not saying that across the board the collective is the higher moral obligation. Collective vs. individual is a moral area that must be carefully weighed. For me, the clarifying question when suborning one's will to the collective is, "what if they are wrong vs what if I am wrong".
In the case of mask wearing, if they were wrong, there's relatively little harm. 24 months of off and on, minor discomfort. That is something for which, when weighed against the advice of experts is worth submitting over.
Dietary science improves! -> Companies puts stuff in food to make people eat more and get fatter than ever before!
Psychology science improves! -> Companies get better at designing ads and manipulating groups of people into self destructive behavior than ever before!
Or yeah, I guess that makes sense. Science can be used for bad or good, we need to regulate away the bad cases and then science is mostly good.