It didn't really work out in practice though.

I mean I googled it and found a bunch of studies of spreads on buses

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

and I think these sort of studies are very low value guesses

you can't tell if a particular spread had some special case

can we talk about the danger of churches because of the supposed "suprerspreader" case in SK?

(no)

Generally anywhere with poor ventilation, IIRC

Is a hard vector.

that doesn't really tell us anything about masks though

I think it's determining whether or not it's infections primarily from breathing or aerosolized particles or from touching surfaces and getting contaminated.

Of course, the former is the most likely.

either way masks help

By like, a huge margin.

Probably 96+%.

mask on? less particles in the air to breath. Less particles on surfaces to touch

masks off? not so much

Not entirely true, less large particles for sure.

less all particles

masks aren't tiny-particle _proof_

but they do reduce them AFAIK

The main vector is likely stuff that hangs in the air suspended for a long time though.

even then

you get a smaller dose if breathed through a mask, and if dispensed through a mask

The main vector is particles that wouldn't be stopped by most masks (unless you happen to be running around with an N95)

And know how to wear it properly.

The mask idea is primarily to prevent spread, not protect the user (which it doesn't really do in most cases)

that won't be stopped _perfectly_

they would certainly be _reduced_

your pants won't stop pee

but I still want you to wear them

lol

Pretty sure that we know that viral load is important to disease severity.

until you show me a study that proves with _finality_ that masks are not effective _at all_ or are worse than wearing nothing, imma default to assuming that it is logical to wear them

But I am not sure how much we know about the vectors of typical infection rates.

If it's primarily small aerosolized particles (likely), or large ones that slowly float down to the ground (unlikely).

I'm not personally against masks, but I have a feeling I understand where Doc is coming from.

Forgive me if I'm interpreting it wrong, Doc.

But if we say 99% of infections are caused by aerosolized particles, masks aren't really going to help in the slightest.

I could be wrong, but aerosolized particles are practically free-moving between surgical masks and the like. I'm not sure how effectively they filter them.