Sorry, Maggie, but only the first source you quote isn't either popular "science" or tendentious evangelism. The first one seems to hinge on viruses invariably being spread in airborne droplets. The actual size of a virus particle is hundreds of times smaller than the ones captured by the best particle-trapper cited in the article, and you are ignoring what I said about the aggravated spread of virus from improperly-handled used masks. And an infected person, out and about not knowing that they are infected, would pollute their mask within seconds of putting it on. Yes, masks stop some droplets. But then what? Whip it off, chuck it on the dashboard until you get to the next shop. Then put it back on, using your fingers on the fabric to bend the wire back round your nose. And not all virus will be in droplets, and droplets evaporate. I'm not campaigning to get rid of masks and I wear a mask according to the rules wherever I go. The really wilfully stupid thing is to look at data with the intention of getting it to prove what you already believe. As I said a couple of posts ago, any one of us can easily find sources that claim that masks are a good thing and others that claim that masks are a bad thing. There is plenty of scope on both sides for getting it wrong, which is why vacuous unqualified statements such as "masks save lives" get my goat somewhat. I know how hard it is to be totally neutral and even-handedly sceptical when looking at data, but that's the way I was trained. Ask Joe about me, him and God...