"This is a particularly insidious form of advocacy because it mimics the writing of a scientific article while presenting a political opinion." "Not one sugges

"This is a particularly insidious form of advocacy because it mimics the writing of a scientific article while presenting a political opinion." "Not one suggested that masks didn’t work. 2 showed they did work." You're right, if I hadn't been reading the research papers on the matter over the past few weeks I reckon I'd likely be fooled (at least in some parts). Dr Rancourt points out that: "The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective dose is smaller than one aerosol particle." What he fails to mention is how N95/P2 masks actually work. From my reading, these masks are made by stretching the plastic sheet until they start to part and form into string-like strands/fibers with gaps between them. He's right, the gaps are wider than 2.5 μm (somewhere around 5 μm) but the hidden factor is that the stretching of the plastic causes electrostatic charges to permanently form on the plastic through deformation somewhat akin to the way the charge is formed on an electret microphone and it is these charges that attract the aerosol particles which then collect on the plastic strands. It seems Dr Rancourt's search of the literature was insufficiently deep (seems it's another instance of a non-expert in the field stepping above his station). The most disconcerting aspect of Rancourt's report is the statement that it only takes one virion particle to infect a human. It was my understanding that the figure was considerably higher than this. If his quoted figure is correct then N95 mask won't work as they're only about 95% effective. Until we get more definitive information on this I'll continue to wear my N95 masks in public.