Madsen misleads about masks and liberty

Claiming scientific understanding of mask effectiveness is not “established dogma.” Sue Lani Madsen misled Spokesman readers about mask effectiveness (“Science on masks should be treated as process,” Aug. 12).

Science is never fully “established.” It is a continuing process of evidence gathering from which we come to understand our world. Early in the process, new evidence may greatly alter previous interpretations. Later observations often fill in details without changing fundamental understandings. Importantly, incomplete knowledge doesn’t preclude applying compelling evidence we already have gathered. Recent revelations about gravity, for example, haven’t changed the fact that if we miss a step we’ll fall down the stairs!

We may not know everything about passage of viral particles through masks. But we do know masks reduce the velocity and distance exhaled particles initially travel — increasing effective social distance. N-95s are better than surgical masks are better than bandanas — and all are better than nothing. Observations confirm that where masking was consistently practiced, COVID infection rates have been lower.

Sue Lani continued efforts to mislead (“For many, vaccination mandate is a step too far,” Aug. 19), conflating personal choices with communicable diseases. Pregnancy, obesity, and bicycle head injuries — from failure to wear a helmet — are not contagious. If you step on a nail and refuse vaccination, others cannot catch your tetanus, but they can catch your exhaled airborne virus.

Sue Lani should have embraced the social responsibility of vaccination. And, she should have emphasized that wearing masks is our best defense against those who have forgotten that personal liberty comes with the responsibility of not harming others.

Steven C. Amstrup, Ph.D.

Bozeman, Mont.