Where I live in a senior community the residents on my street began to gather outside every afternoon at 3 PM to socialize for about a half hour. One or two weren’t wearing masks at first but eventually they began to do so. They struggled to stay six feet apart but more or less managed to do so.
Being risk averse I didn’t join them for a couple of months but recently began to do so. Otherwise I have been sheltering in place. Rather than availing myself of the food I am paying for by going into one of our two dinning areas which now only serve take-out and enforce the six foot distancing and encourage mask wearing, I have been having my food delivered from the grocery store. I cook at home and have amused myself by ordering new non-stick cookware on Amazon to replace my old scratched pots and pans. I even ordered a new George Foreman grill.
I’d settled in to a life of reading and streaming video and talking to friends on the phone. In addition to the brief socializing with my neighbors my outside activity consisted of walking my dogs and avoiding talking to people I encountered unless they were wearing masks.
Then I tuned in to MSNBC this morning and heard Dr. Michael T. Osterholm, an infectious disease epidemiologist, regents professor, and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, being interviewed.
He said that wearing any mask except the N-95 was really not effective in preventing Covid-19 transmission and infection.
Was I hearing right, I asked myself.
Being an inveterate fact checker I looked it up and as you can see from my illustration what I determined did not make me a happy (outside) camper.
Below, the articles shown above (clockwise):
Coronavirus expert Dr. Osterholm questions guidelines on cloth masks, says they don't stand up to virus' air assault
New study questions the effectiveness of masks against SARS-CoV-2
Report on face masks' effectiveness for Covid-19 divides scientists
Covid-19: face mask rules more political than scientific, says UK expert
There’s lots more, but all the reports of studies muddy the water more than provide an answer. For example this study was done on hamsters: Wearing a face mask can reduce coronavirus transmission by up to 75%, study says.
It’s not that we aren’t used to this kind of thing. Eggs are bad for you, no, they’re really good for you. Coffee is bad for you, no, it’s really good for you. Alcohol, a little is good but too much is bad, but how much is too much? However, this is Covid-19 and giving ourselves a false sense of security can kill us.
Putting all this in context we have Donald Trump and Maskgate. One thing is certain, whether these masks are effective or not one thing can't be disputed. As the Politico article “Wearing a mask is for smug liberals. Refusing to is for reckless Republicans” health benefit or symbolic exercise mask wearing has become a controversial issue.
It is too bad that we can’t merely look at the science of this question, but thanks to Donald Trump it has become infected with at worst misinformation and at best contradictory information.
I wrote about gender differences in attitudes about mask wearing here.
Here’s a diary I wrote about the political and social conscience message we send, regardless of how effective a mask is. It is a shame that in the era of Trump so many of his zealous his supporters lack empathy for people they consider to the the other. They have no social conscience. They mirror the president in that, like him, they have a void in their psyche where most people have a conscience.