Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I get all of that. But when you have (let's call it) 10 percent of the normal travel, that's gonna reduce the number of infected people coming in. That, and the aforementioned habits made it a non-factor. I still do not believe that masks really work, unless it's a properly and professionally fitted N95.

Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine—but vaccination remains vital | Science | AAAS

Just how effective is mask-wearing? Here's what 3 new studies found. (advisory.com)
Just how effective is mask-wearing? Here's what 3 new studies found. (advisory.com)


Humans seem most comfortable with binary data, it either works, or it doesn't.  The idea it could be partially effective is resisted.

Thanks for that first link. I had not seen any studies previously that actually showed that natural infection was superior.

I do think the point is important that we should not be encouraging people to acquire the virus naturally in order to get this protection--but for those who have confirmed cases, it is good information.

It's also highlighted in that study that natural infection PLUS vaccination is superior to either. Which is important.
Well, I haven't seen any actual data on negative factors of mask-wearing, beyond cases of maskne (mask acne). I know some people think they're going to pass out because of too much CO2, which is BS. And others think that children will be emotionally stunted for life by wearing a mask a couple hours a day. But neither of those have, to my knowledge, been supported by actual data.

So the balancing test of mask-wearing, i.e. benefit vs cost, is balancing something with some unknown benefit vs basically zero cost.

That said, the balancing test of a mask mandate is different, because there is a personal liberty. It's hard to quantify the personal liberty cost of being forced to wear a mask, but I think that cost is much larger than any other "negative factors" to social, emotional, or physical well-being.

So having widespread [and free at the point of distribution] vaccine availability, IMHO, flips that cost/benefit calculation such that mask mandates are no longer justifiable. Those who desire the protection of the vaccine can have it and don't need to wear a mask, and those who don't desire the protection of the vaccine nor to wear a mask are implicitly accepting the consequences of that decision.

But beyond that, I do believe that the simple discomfort of the mask IS a legitimate negative factor to be considered in weighing the tradeoffs.  Was my discomfort worth the benefit to society of my wearing it? In a pre-vaccine world, yes.  Now?  Nope.