It’s misleading to say there’s no evidence of smear transmission. Take that choral rehearsal you mention. Could have been that they breathed in droplets, also c

It’s misleading to say there’s no evidence of smear transmission. Take that choral rehearsal you mention. Could have been that they breathed in droplets, also could have been that a droplet found their way to a shirt, the person touched their shirt, touched their face, bingo. The virus is known to survive on surfaces for several hours. In close, confined quarters the answer to smear vs droplet is likely “yes”. Masks are most useful in stopping droplets from people who are actively shedding virus. This is probably the key driver for why in some mask wearing societies transmission is far lower. Masks are clearly helpful in confined spaces and in the immediate radius of someone who coughed a few seconds ago. These conditions are what medical personnel face daily, hence they wear masks. Similarly people like Uber drivers or grocery clerks likely would benefit if well fitted and they don’t touch their face more. Masks are maybe useful when around those who aren’t coughing (you make droplets when you breathe or talk) but generally that social distancing 6ft should cover that. Still, if you don’t touch your face more, it doesn’t hurt and might help a little. Masks aren’t doing a whole lot walking around the street. As you and the article note if a mask makes you touch your face more, it could even be harmful. In almost all of these cases, social distancing and hand washing is likely far more effective than masks. “Are masks useful?” is a complicated question, but as the article suggests, it’s probably, “a little, wash your hands, keep distant, that helps much more.”