"Homemade masks appear to be reasonably effective" is hardly a compelling case.
"Homemade masks appear to be reasonably effective" is hardly a compelling case.
If we were to weigh the priors, the existing evidence would be leaving towards mask use having a protective effect. The question that we should ask ourselves is, what if the reality turns out to be different? There are 2 scenarios. First, mask use is harmful and the second, mask use has no effect on transmission. The first is very unlikely given what we know and the second will mean that if mask use is encouraged, it will be wasted resources for no gain. If these resources that were wasted were easily obtainable i.e. masks made of old clothing etc, then the downsides aren't serious at all but could have very good upsides if the priors were right.
So I agree, that we should encourage widespread home-made masks use and leave the disposable ones to the healthcare workers.
I guess if you believe that's actually true, you should be advocating for doctors to stop wearing masks...
But that's not something we do, because we have enough priors that masks help that we will continue to use them.
I realize that you are just enjoying being contrary here, but please try to think through your argument and ensure it isn't incorrect in itself before posting.
Absence of evidence does not prevent you from making decisions or otherwise coming to conclusions. The fact is, you can make decisions with no evidence at all. Your outcome may be no better than chance but also likely no worse.
Not making a decision can be worse than chance, especially in time critical or low information environments and if you always “wait for the evidence” you will end up being worse than a magic 8-ball at the most crucial moments.
(1) https://www.forbes.com/sites/tjmccue/2020/03/20/calling-all-... (2) https://www.uza.be/mondmaskers. (in Dutch)