Isn't the main reason for the success of this measure precisely to make any infected people retain droplets (big or small) inside the mask?
I'm not saying it doesn't offer any protection from droplets in the air, but the main motivation was containing droplets.
In this case, Choir practice it's literally a spit fest - you're singing loudly in a tightly packed large group of people. It's like the perfect scenario for spread.
Even if they are in rows, you get them on your head, neck, shoulders, hands, pants, sheets of paper you're holding, even shoes.
Also, if it is indeed suspended in air, then wouldn't the minimum requirement be N95 masks?
The one thing that people don't seem to think about is even if it's only effective at keeping droplets from infected people from spreading, how are all of the asymptomatic supposed to know they should wear a mask?
The obvious solution is that everyone should wear a mask. I think people keep discouraging mask use due to the shortage, but if people are misinforming the public due to a shortage that's still not cool
Communication wise isn't straight forward, but in this case I think the masses should know it bluntly. "You could be a source of spread, so use a mask in public."
Because on one side I understand that "use masks" might give a sense of false security, and stresses supply chains... but there are other ways of doing it - promote community production, even if it is rudimentary. Some countries are using prisons. I mean, there are ways around it.
I haven't seen ant misinformation discouraging mask use.
I have seen people point out: (1) it is most critical that healthcare workers have masks, (2) masks are not particularly effective for protecting the wearer, but they are very helpful for protecting others from the wearer.
#2 is enough to discourage use from the selfish who are unconcerned with social consequences, #1 tends to discourage those who are concerned with social consequences, given the supply shortage.
I'm not from America. I'm from Europe. So you're basically saying we need tens of billion of masks worldwide... that simply won't happen.
I understand that would be the optimal solution in your opinion. But some countries are showing good results with a not so optimal solution, which is surgical masks and home made masks.
As odd as this my sound, but at the moment you might have a larger bottle neck in N95 production than you have on ventilators (taking into account the disposable nature of N95 masks and the sheer volume required for usage, I'm not trying to compare ventilators to N95 in terms of complexity or their production lines).
Of all of this, I think an effective treatment seems to be the fastest solution (though there's none available yet), where you'd deploy treatment only to those in intensive care and ICU.
It seems we all should be wearing masks in public!