Don't get me wrong - the Bangladesh study suggested that masks were a good public health initiative and should be used. What it didn't do was reassure me that they were a strong individual NPI.
In much the same way that not masking was recommended early in the pandemic as a public health initiative to reserve the masks for first responders - wasn't particularly good advice for the individual.
So - several threads here. It’s not unreasonable to try to understand what helps globally as well as individually. Early on, when supply chains for masks were stretched or non-existent, we were instructed not to wear masks. This was good advice globally, as it reserved the limited supply for those who could most benefit from them (first responders) - but bad advice individually. If you were looking for guidance to protect yourself and those you loved, following global advice was not the best path.
Likewise, the current guidance that wearing masks - particularly if they are well fit FFP3/99%+ filtering, is good advice globally, but it’s unclear if it’s sufficient to reduce the risk down to <.1% for the individual (the point at which I would pretty much not worry about social distancing and avoiding stores, workplace, etc… I’m <65 and vaccinated, So I would be comfortable with a 1/1000 risk of catching Covid, particularly as I can usually avoid those scenarios)
The question isn’t whether masks are an important NPI - they absolutely are - particularly if we could convince people to avoid going indoors unmasked and ensuring they are wearing (and not taking off) well fit FFP3s, the question is whether that is sufficient to mostly eliminate the risk of catching Covid.
One lesson I learned here is that you really need to expand on your thoughts and not assume everyone else is already on the same wavelength as yourself.
In much the same way that not masking was recommended early in the pandemic as a public health initiative to reserve the masks for first responders - wasn't particularly good advice for the individual.