Your misrepresentations are becoming more subtle. In this post you try to trick the reader into believing that a statement of the form "masks CAN block particles" is inconsistent with the assertion that there is reasonable evidence that they also do, in fact, block particles.I see. You want to post something on multi-layer cloth masks, something that was not advocated from the beginning, nor was mandated later, nor has been practiced by a large number of Americans.
Cloth masks not only effectively block most large droplets (i.e., 20-30 microns and larger) but they can also block the exhalation of fine droplets and particles (also often referred to as aerosols) smaller than 10 microns ; which increase in number with the volume of speech and specific types of phonation.
There is a huge difference between saying "masks can also block fine droplets" and saying something like, "It has been scientifically demonstrated that cloth masks block 80% to 90% of covid particles in normal use." We know what the science says, and it does not say "cloth masks can be depended upon to block most covid particles." What science says is "cloth masks CAN block covid particles."
13 Multi-layer cloth masks can both block up to 50-70% of these fine droplets and particles and limit the forward spread of those that are not captured.5,6,15,16 Upwards of 80% blockage has been achieved in human experiments that have measured blocking of all respiratory droplets,4 with cloth masks in some studies performing on par with surgical masks as barriers for source control
Does the science say masks consistently block 50% to 70% of fine covid droplets? No, it does not. It says, again, masks CAN block most fine particles ( we assume that means under certain situations and in certain conditions.)
But these are not inconsistent.