* Are they used correctly by the majority?
* Are the situations where masks are/were used actually the main contributors to infections overall?
* How well do masks work in situations with long time of contact and wearing (public transport, on the job site, ...)?
* + Probably a lot of other questions
So it can very well be that the impact of masks overall and in comparison with other measures is lower than controlled experiments suggest. If that's the case it does not mean wearing a mask is a bad idea but knowing this could influence decisions on mandating doing it.
There are however fairly low understanding of other public health tools that is outside the scope of what medical professionals can do. Shutting down mass transportation, restricting travel, shutting down social activities. Finland as an example fully closed down their capital during the start of the pandemic, preventing almost all movement in and out of the city. Looking at the graphs, that alone might have been what attribute the low case and death rates, and its not something that the medical profession has many studies on.
That doesn't say there was a clear understanding. So not only were many effectively not wearing masks, we now can't make reliable heads or tails of the "post match" data.
If that's not negligence, then it was intentional. Neither is a good explanation.
And then, saying at least Duck&Cover! in case of a thermonuclear explosion, because SDI/Iron Dome/Someshinyshield failed. Better late than never? Or nothing at all?
At some point they had to say something.
This ^^^ isn't a conspiracy theory. This is what happened and is still happening. How am I, or anyone, supposed to truth that architecture?