> The line of reasoning was that masks were in deep shortage, and in the scenario it made more sense to get supplies to front line medical staff, and particular

> The line of reasoning was that masks were in deep shortage, and in the scenario it made more sense to get supplies to front line medical staff, and particularly to avoid people hoarding masks. The effectiveness of masks was purposely downplayed to affect desired outcome of the population. No. The line of reasoning was there was a deep shortage and with the information they had at the time, they did not think that masks were necessary or useful for the average person. They didn’t lie and say masks don’t work, they said masks don’t work like people think they do and they didn’t believe it was necessary or productive to wear them. And masks don’t provide meaningful protection to the person wearing them. They provide meaningful protection to the people around the mask wearer. So going and getting a non-N95 to keep from getting covid, was and is wrong. > “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.” - Dr. Fauci, March 8, 2020…How on earth could we pull a 'moral 180' on some behaviour so quickly without really any new information? This can’t possibly be serious. We have been learning new information about this completely novel virus every single week. It is a completely new virus we knew nothing about a year ago. That statement was made on March 8th, when there were a few thousand cases in the US. We had a very different understanding of the fatality rate, the R naught value of infection rates, the methods of transmissibility, the incubation period, the rate of asymptomatic cases. The list goes on. > This is a pretty good example of what propaganda is because it demonstrates the moral ambiguity of 'truth, communication and outcomes'. This is a terrible example because it relies completely on both hindsight bias that people knew then what we know now about a novel virus, and on a basic lack of understanding of how masks even work, failing to understand the statements made about them. What was true about masks 9 months ago is true now. Wearing a non-N95 mask will do very little to protect you if you are exposed to Covid. Wearing a mask will drastically reduce you transmitting the virus to other people. The mask shouldn’t be seen as an individual prophylactic. The mask should be seen as a collective protection measure.