This demonstrates how people stand on the science they want, yet the science shifts and changes to support different people's conclusions. There are other studies over the past years that demonstrate cloth masks are ineffective. That science and this one from the CDC aren't stood on because it didn't conform to the desired conclusion people want to have accepted. When a paper does support what someone wants, then they stand on that science to advocate their position.

What other infected? Might be able? Ok, it might. How so? If the particles are larger? Sure. Is that the case with coronavirus? What criteria is applied to the "might"? Might isn't scientific position to base something on, is it? I didn't say this study, but other studies, conclude... yet I was wrong about the N95 part as I made a bad recall from memory, as studies do show they make a difference from cloth masks.