🇳🇱
#2 is debatable. It wouldnt need to spread from surface to mask. It would also be able to spread via captured droplets. The mask is filtering the ir, this means a high degree of infected droplets are constantly being captured by the mask.
To #1 Id say the increase is overwhelming. Normally with a mask every sip of your drink you must touch the mask and usually incidentally your face, something you wouldn't do without a mask,.
#2 we covered.
#3 is not entierly true either. even if the lower spread to the environment was significant, but non-zero, it can easily be offset and reversed by a significant increase in your ability to be infected yourself.
@freemo With 2 my point was the droplets that are captured by the mask would likely enter either your nose or mouth in the couterfactual, thus this cannot be _worse_.
Regarding 1 I doubt you wouldn't touch your face at all in this situation without a mask (e.g. wiping you mouth?), but I also don't generally drink or eat much when I'm out and about, so maybe I lack expertise. On the other hand I don't think that many people do this a lot anyway (maybe it's different in the US?).
Agreed on 3, the only way this can be worse is if you actually get a significant increase in infection risk when masked. This means that 1 and 2 not only have to be true, but they need to have significant effects.
@timorl yes thats fair, the droplet route alone wouldnt cut it. If the droplet route were the only route and transfer of the disease from excess touching of the face and mask werent a factor at all then I'd expect masks to be somewhat effective.