New York Times Readers React to the Latest Mask Study

A major Cochrane study of the effectiveness of masks and other interventions in preventing the spread of respiratory disease found that “wearing a mask can make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness… and likely makes little or no difference in how many people have confirmed flu/COVID through a lab test.” In his Wednesday column, the New York TimesBret Stephens argued the study results should lead those pushing for mask mandates to “acknowledge their mistake, along with its significant physical, psychological, educational and political costs”.

The Just‘s readership was not interested. One response stands out, from a reader named David Yanes:

Bret Stephens slandered and applauded the wrong people. Mr Stephens’ conclusion, based on the Cochrane study, that “mask mandates were a flop” may be true. I don’t know. But I do know that the CDC and other medical professionals who have recommended mask wearing didn’t act out of incompetence, negligence, or any sinister reason. Based on the best available scientific evidence, these men and women did their best to protect the health and safety of the American people.

On the other hand, most opponents of the Mandates were not based on an assessment of science, but on a misguided interpretation of American individualism rooted in right-wing ideology, reinforced by Donald Trump and amplified on the internet.

Intention and motive are important. Even if masks turn out to be ineffective against the spread of Covid, before we demand an apology from the people who have been on the front lines fighting the pandemic, as Mr Stephens is doing, we should remember who is responsible for that welfare of the country and who objected to the precautionary measures for political, not health, reasons.

Let’s assume that some opponents of the mask mandate did so because of a “misguided interpretation of American individualism.” That doesn’t say much. Many advocates of the mask mandate did so out of a “misguided” desire for solidarity theater.

There was never any evidence that the masks worked as advocates promised. Yanes’ argument that “the best available science” requires the kind of mask policy we have enacted was never accurate at any point during the pandemic.

The idea that proponents of mask mandates are “working for the good of the country” while opponents object on “political, not health, grounds” is something one could only believe unless one sees or cares about the costs involved linked to forcing people to cover their faces in public. Thousands of children with speech disabilities were developmentally retarded. Disabled adults slowly lost acquired social skills over the decades and were denied access to public places unless they wore a mask on their face. Elderly men and women died surrounded by the half-covered faces of their children and grandchildren. If concern about this human cost was inspired by “right-wing ideology,” then many right-wing ideologues were vindicated by the Cochrane report.