I think you've misunderstood me completely. I'm not trying to get "distance" or convince you of anything. In my office, I show you what your options are and talk about relative risks but the decision is always yours. This is no different.

Here's the American Chemical Society's Public Health Emergency Initiative snippet which is likely the most thorough and current evaluation available.

The COVID-19 pandemic is currently causing a severe disruption and shortage in the global supply chain of necessary personal protective equipment (e.g., N95 respirators). The U.S. CDC has recommended use of household cloth by the general public to make cloth face coverings as a method of source control. We evaluated the filtration properties of natural and synthetic materials using a modified procedure for N95 respirator approval. Common fabrics of cotton, polyester, nylon, and silk had filtration efficiency of 5–25%, polypropylene spunbond had filtration efficiency 6–10%, and paper-based products had filtration efficiency of 10–20%. An advantage of polypropylene spunbond is that it can be simply triboelectrically charged to enhance the filtration efficiency (from 6 to >10%) without any increase in pressure (stable overnight and in humid environments). Using the filtration quality factor, fabric microstructure, and charging ability, we are able to provide an assessment of suggested fabric materials for homemade facial coverings. A summary of the results described in this manuscript is presented in Table 2, ranked by filtration quality factor, Q. Cotton, polyester, and polypropylene multilayered structures can meet or even exceed the efficiency of materials used in some medical face masks. However, the exact number of layers, basis weight, and thread-count of material will need to be considered in addition to the fluid resistance and performance under breathing. In our work (Table S1), we found that a five-layer structure of PP-4 after charging can achieve filtration efficiency ∼50%. Although the medical face masks tested here (∼19–33% filtration efficiency) have a pressure drop of roughly 16–34 Pa, the five-layer structure can achieve a higher filtration efficiency and pressure drop <10 Pa. This is particularly relevant, as there is a concern in the sealing of both disposable medical masks and cloth face coverings. We reiterate that these filtration efficiencies are only applicable if there is no leakage in the seals of the masks, as loose-fitting devices such as these coverings and medical masks do not have any gasket or tight-fitting mechanism to ensure a proper seal. The leakage of air around the seal areas is significant and can contribute to real-world exposure to aerosols.24,26 Previous reports suggest that 60% of users fail the fitting of surgical masks on first attempt.24 This risk is also carried over in cloth face coverings that do not have any special form of sealing. When designing new facial coverings for community use, it is advisible to make users aware of this risk and to design cloth face coverings with pressure drop across the covering is as low as possible (with filtration efficiency as high as possible), otherwise air contaminants (particulates, viruses, infectious droplets, etc.) will preferentially flow through gaps and leaks at the skin and cloth contact points limiting any effectiveness of filtration in a de facto form of respiratory protection. The general public should be aware of the risks of self-contamination during removal and reuse of cloth face coverings. Finally, an important distinction to make is that surgical masks are designed and intended as a form of barrier protection and provide fluid resistance for use in hospitals. The materials evaluated in this study for cloth face coverings are not intended to be used by healthcare workers or any other workers as a form of respiratory protection. Further, we did not investigate the effects of cleaning or disinfecting of the materials studied. These effects could be evaluated in future work. Personal protective equipment, such as surgical masks cleared for sale by the FDA and respiratory protection approved by NIOSH, comprise only one aspect of a hierarchy of infection prevention and control measures. The WHO and CDC recommend that other measures also be used with masks or respirators.14,39 These additional measures as well as the efficacy of cloth coverings are covered in the Supporting Information.


The above reference is similar to many others that show a lack of effectiveness of most masks with HOW the general public is using them. Obviously, we should first follow the law and then whatever we each feel is in our best interest. The only public mask I've worn in the last few months was getting on a commercial flight and I wore an N95 but I also don't go to many public places. The OP says to "Just wear the mask" implying don't ask any questions but that's setting a dangerous precedent based on some very lopsided information.

I respect your right to wear a mask in a car alone or when you're out at the lake fishing, etc., but just remember where your rights end and mine begin. If you want to classify me as an "anti-masker" than that's fine, though I wear one frequently. I'm more a proponent of getting educated on a topic and thinking for ourselves. Socially distance from each other during this tough time as we know that works. Oh yeah...... Wash your hands fanatically and quit touching your face.

J

I see a chick-fil-a date night in the works.

I see a chick-fil-a date night in the works.

So what are we arguing about here?

That's it.... I might as well beat my head against the wall.

I'll accept my defeat on the poll.

J

That's it.... I might as well beat my head against the wall.

I'll accept my defeat on the poll.

J