Just because you can't immediately disprove something doesn't mean that it isn't bullshit.
Actual facts would be something like washing your hands or boiling water preventing diseases. Nobody questions it anymore but they once did. But for the same reason, it's important to let people question. It was once doctors who opposed the idea of sanitation.
it's the implied answers that are the problem, the jumping to conclusions
People are questioning exactly these things. Germ theory itself is under attack. Masks have been used for many years in healthcare settings to hinder the spread of airborne pathogens, yet now we hear they are useless...
The effectiveness of masks is complicated. It is not a black or white situation.
[1] https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
> Four trials were cluster-RCTs, with all participants in the intervention clusters required to wear masks, thus assessing both source control and personal protection
> In two [of the four] trials the clusters were households with a member with new influenza; neither of these studies found any protective effect
> In two [of the four] trials the clusters were college dormitories during the influenza season; neither study found any reduction
I wouldn't go as far as saying that masks do not work. At the same time, I wouldn't go as far as saying that they do work.
Reality is messy. If you want to wear a mask, do it. If not, don't.
> Reality is messy.
I understand that in this era of "alternative facts" the view is not universally shared, but I do believe that reality contains objective truths if only we can get at them. Either masks hinder the spread of germs (in the prior this has high probability based on logic and the experience of many years) or they don't. We are down to four trials now instead of nine, and only three that count, since one was excluded by these authors for methodological shortcomings. Don't blame it on "reality" that none of these was sufficiently large to establish the truth either way.
Edit:
> in the prior this has high probability based on logic and the experience of many years
Reality can be counter-intuitive if you put your logic and experience to the test. Famous example: Using diuretics for antidiuretic effects [1]
Even a banal situation like wearing a face mask during surgery leads to inconclusive results [2]. Does it increase or decrease the number of cases of wound infections? There seems to be no clear evidence atm
[1] https://jasn.asnjournals.org/content/15/11/2948
[2] https://www.cochrane.org/CD002929/WOUNDS_disposable-surgical...
A good example here, is how decades ago the FDA recommended people avoid eating fat (butter, lard, etc). This is how the fat-free movement started, and then it turned out that eating fat is actually benefitial for one's health. This misguided the public and food companies into substituting fat for sugars and carbs, which was very bad for public health.
I think what we're seeing is huge disagreements on the validity of the institutions themselves. We just experienced four years of defiance from one side, distrusting government, and now that same side is asking everyone to fall inline. This is what I believe is at the core of the disagreement.