Re: Masks WERE/ARE science
I don't know where your lab coat is, but if you are any kind of science person you should be deeply, deeply ashamed of yourself. You say:
Cloth masks are for reducing the droplet infection vector - unfortunately even the CDC now admits Covid-19 also has an airborne transmission vector.
This is false. Please stop spreading misinformation. There are two transmission paths for CV19: by touching things, and by droplets of water in the air. The big droplets are often called 'ballistic' because they follow ballistic trajectories and the small ones are aerosols. The boundary is of course fuzzy. What people call 'airborne transmission' is aerosol transmission – you don't get naked virus particles sitting in the air. Something like a face shield or visor is a good protection against ballistic droplets, but is useless against aerosols. Cloth masks are dramatically effective against aerosol transmission: see for instance the aerosol transmission FAQ, from which this quote comes:
Studies have found that homemade masks made out of tea cloth or cotton t-shirt material offer about 50% protection. Unpublished studies by Linsey Marr at Virginia Tech, John Volckens at Colorado State University, and Carl Wang at Missouri Science and Technology indicate that single layers of common fabrics have low filtration efficiencies for 0.3-μm aerosols but block about 50% of 2-μm aerosols and 80% or more of 5-μm and larger aerosols. If you use two layers or more of fabric, the overall efficiency can drastically increase to 90% or higher across all aerosol sizes larger than 0.5 μm. Virus is found in aerosols of all sizes, but those larger than 1 μm are probably most important for transmission.
So please, either read the fucking literature, or shut up. Spouting uninformed bullshit is killing people: stop it.