Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

There are 0 studies that I know of, of public use of cloth, there are filtration experiments, but only one RCT I know of from 2011 in hospitals. There is good anecdotal and historical data, but what “we know” isn’t as clear, I think.

I've looked into it. There's a very strong body of evidence supporting N95s (which many people in CA *already had* due to widespread wildfires) and surgical masks, and homemade masks are variable based in material and construction but appear not to be useless.

But I have never, ever seen empirical evidence suggesting that cloth masks *increase* the risk of contracting a viral illness, and to date it's one of the most egregious claims I've ever seen by someone touting any sort of relevant credentials.

The single RCT Vietnam did just that, though experimental conditions were complicated. The problem I see is a ton of misinformation about cloth filtration powers from a study with 21 subjects. And no one has tested if masks, absent public health ed make people take greater risks.

One problem I noticed when looking over literature on DIY masks a few weeks ago is that you'd see everything from "t-shirt over face" to a fitted 3-layer design with a filter substrate. As with condoms, "don't engage in risky behavior" is key. Blaming the condom is woo territory

The parallels here really bug me. If you won't teach someone how to obtain, maintain, and use a mask and then call mask-wearing ineffective, you're not far off the mark from the folks who do the same with condoms and tout the "improper use" stats.

The literature is just that. For 20 years everyone is writing we should run good experiments and design good cloth masks to test, but no one did. This was considered technology only the poor needed, so no one funded the research. Who is the you in your statement?