Dig a little deeper into the medical expert advice and you'll find that there are practically no studies on the effectiveness of masks in public settings in terms of reducing the spread of viruses. Most studies relate to their use in medical settings, where much more stringent hygiene regimes exist, i.e. hands to bee washed immediately before applying or immediately after removing masks, if touched they should be securely replaced etc etc. And there are good reasons for this, because if you do have the virus instead of the viral load being exhaled into the air and rapidly dispersed, a mask can collect the load and if the medical protocols are not followed could easily be transferred to common surfaces where the risk of spread might actually be higher.
So for these two reasons many people object to their use because a few experts think that they "might work", and of course others are genuinely concerned that they might actually be part of the problem. And looking at the data, increased mask mandating doesn't seem to be working in a lot of countries.
That myth about there being no studies is oft repeated. Yet where a study has been conducted - in Jena - and shown a marked reduction in transmission in the community, it gets ignored or dismissed. Apparently it’s not a randomised control trial, or its observational, so doesn't really count.
This is then followed up, repeatedly, by toxic language about “maskivists” or “Karens”, deriding those who are willing to wear masks. It then progresses into assertions about civil liberties, decrying and denying the rights of government to implement public health measures.
I dislike mask wearing in public, for the same reasons that I dislike other face coverings in public - they remove an important part of the person wearing them from the public domain. When it comes to wearing on myself, they are also uncomfortable, tiresome and of limited benefit to me personally.
Yet I do so, willingly, because I recognise that my actions have impact on others. They are a measure that benefit my fellow man more than they do me, and they help create a climate that allows those more vulnerable to lead something more like a normal life. As much to the point, I respect the law and am not so solipsistic that I consider myself above it.
There are good reasons to be uncomfortable with how the government are acting, and especially how they’re introducing these regulations. These measures are only acceptable if limited in time, it does nothing for anyone’s confidence when the regulations are only published late the night before they come into effect, and the emasculation of Parliament is worrying. And, yes, enforcement is often cackhanded and crude. Those, and others, are very valid arguments, and are - too rarely - presented. Unfortunately, what’s instead presented too often is the view that someone’s above/better than the law, deriding those they disagree with while using the same or more aggressive language than that they disagree with.
