Of the 172 observational studies identified in the Lancet meta-study, 29 are observational studies regarding the efficacy of masks specifically - the others fall outside of this scope. These studies are: https://files.catbox.moe/i9ph7n.png I do not disregard the 25 observational studies on the efficacy of masks with regard to SARS-1 and MERS. Apparently this subtlety is lost on you: their relevance is lessened but not eliminated. The primary reason they are less relevant is because both of those pathogens exhibit markedly different vectors of infectivity. Influenza is most comparable to SARS-COV-2 in this regard, notwithstanding the conclusion of the authors of one study I cited. Citing the CDC is not funny, despite the fact that their conclusion with regard to masks is not supported by the extant scientific data on the whole. What is strange is how you refuse to respond with substance.