I think this is where "science" has failed us and needs to own up to it. For the record, I do believe science is the best way to ultimately find truth, but it is a slow, laborious process that often ignores conventional wisdom and common sense in lieu of data. I also believe that data can be fudged for a variety of reasons, and that can set the process on an incorrect tangent for decades (cholesterol studies, for example). The Eddington Expedition was a great example of the scientific method yielding fruitful results. The Seven Countries Study: Not so much.
Early on, the scientists working with only the data suggested that face masks were not useful. The phrase "like setting up a chain link fence to keep mosquitos out" reverberates in my mind over and over and over again. I watched the episode of 60 Minutes and specifically remember Fauci saying "there is no need to wear a mask." He then went on and on about how this virus was primarily transmitted via surface contact, how we should all be washing our hands, not touching contaminated surfaces, and that bleach was the new hotness. I also remember him clamoring about how he hoped this would once and for all "kill the handshake."
I found this odd because, common sense would dictate that this is an awfully inconvenient way to make a living if you're a virus. Sure, someone could smear their dirty hands on a handrail, pick their nose, and you, the virus, can work your way into the respiratory tract... But goddamn, that's a pretty inefficient and stupid way to go about replicating if you're a respiratory pathogen. A stomach virus? Sure. But a respiratory pathogen? That sounds kind of fucking stupid, and to double down on this claim: even stupider. But, hey, the data are what the data are at the time, and we should act on the data and not common sense, right?
This sort of ignorance of simple, basic common sense concerns me in another light. I've brought it up multiple times on this thread, and I believe the first time was in April or May of 2020. If paper masks are quasi-effective, then the only viruses that get spread are those that are naturally selected for more transmissibility. I constantly hear the media and other scientists say that with COVID-19 running rampant, there are more chances for mutations, but what selective pressure is there for it to be transmissible, hardier, STRONGER, without some sort of stress imposed on it?
This is precisely why we ask people to take the full course of their antibiotics. Taking 80% of the regimen creates bacteria that are extraordinarily difficult to kill: Like XDR Tuberculosis. We seem to know that when we kill off all but a small population of microorganisms, those microorganisms continue to adapt and replicate to overcome their imposed hardships. So, for two years, we've had people wearing masks, social distancing (do people really do that?), and acting like fools. But now, I'm reading articles about Omicron, how infectious it is, and that paper masks are not effective at stopping it!
Now, this little development didn't happen because people weren't wearing masks. Why would it? What selective pressure is there to overcome a mask in a population of maskless? Instead, I contend that it was the masks themselves that brought about a virus that the data (for what it's worth) shows is defeating masks. The virus lingers longer, seems to be hardier, and transmits more rapidly. It is also less deadly. So, why don't we just do the world a favor and have everyone rip the goddamn things off their faces, get in a big circle, and get this over with once and fucking for all?