Do Masks Work? It’s a Question of Physics, Biology, and Behavior

You seem to be trying to turn a complex (largely) sociological discussion into a pure science discussion.

We can likely mostly agree that certain lab experiments show that certain masks, when properly worn, have X + Y positive effects to mitigate certain types of particle transmissions. But this still doesn't mean masks should be mandated or even worn by most people.

To start with, it goes without saying that most people don't wear masks even close to correctly, and the experiments that show that masks in a lab setting are effective are not necessarily completely relevant to this discussion. Masks in a medical setting must be a proper type that's fitted, put on correctly, worn for one task in one room for a limited time, and then taken off safely. Nothing about this chain of affairs happens correctly for the overwhelming majority of mask wearing, even by dedicated mask-enthusiasts.

But the bigger question is this. Why should your risk-management decision on masks take precedence over another individuals? Shouldn't an individual have the absolute right to decide their level of acceptable risk for themselves? Let's be clear: there is no scientific experiment that conclusively says that one risk-management decision is an objectively correct one over another. Why should your assessment be forced on another?

And these discussions don't even get into the substantial and numerous harmful effects of masks to peoples lives: even if masks have a positive to offer, the negatives are never considered as part of a rational cost-benefit analysis.

To me, the actual discussion over masks is almost entirely not about anything related to science. We're debating risk-management, values, and costs-benefits.