> But remember back in March? Our glorious leaders were urging us not to buy masks because they don’t work, and besides, doctors need them.
I think this is a bit disingenuous. First of all, you're looking back with the benefit of hindsight and the knowledge of the virus that we have today. Additionally, weren't most of the recommendations around mask wearing that people not gobble up PPE because there was such a shortage of it around the country for first responders and hospital staff? Isn't that one of the primary reasons why people across the country started making homemade masks out of t-shirts and other spare cloth?
I'd also note that we just learned of this Virus at the end of December. We were and are still learning new things about how the virus spreads and how we can effectively fight its spread. The fact that some of the early guidance has been reversed is evidence that scientists are learning more about the virus, not that we shouldn't listen to them or that their advice is 'obvious bullshit'.
You’re completely misinterpreting the mask situation.
Of course they say there’s no evidence that a mask will protect YOU. Masks aren’t supposed to protect YOU. They prevent YOU transmitting the virus to OTHERS. So of course it doesn’t reduce YOUR risk of respiratory infection. That conclusion has not changed.
The guidance was pretty clear: they didn’t want people wearing masks because there was a PPE shortage. Now there isn’t a shortage, so they want people wearing masks.
Are you sure that masks don't protect you? You've made that statement three times in four sentences.
It's false that the guidance was clear the reason for recommending people not wear masks was because of a shortage. US health officials stated that masks were ineffective and may increase the likelihood of infection because of touching your face while wearing a mask.
As someone pointed out Sweden to this day has this to say about mask usage:
"The scientific evidence around the effectiveness of face masks in combatting the spread of infection is weak, which is why different countries have arrived at different recommendations."
The benefit of a free exchange of ideas is that it allows people to originate and develop the ideas that we later recognize are correct in hindsight. The eventual move towards masks wasn't inevitable; there are some countries even today where masks aren't broadly recommended, so if Internet platforms had banned mask advocacy in March there probably would have been a lot more.
(I'm not sure this is on point to Youtube's policy here, though - they say they aren't banning all vaccine skepticism, just specific categories of silly disinformation like microchips.)
That is one big leap, assuming the WHO and other public health organizations would not have changed their minds if it wasn't for "experts" on the internet. I highly doubt that.
I think this is a bit disingenuous. First of all, you're looking back with the benefit of hindsight and the knowledge of the virus that we have today. Additionally, weren't most of the recommendations around mask wearing that people not gobble up PPE because there was such a shortage of it around the country for first responders and hospital staff? Isn't that one of the primary reasons why people across the country started making homemade masks out of t-shirts and other spare cloth?