SA, something odd seems to be happening; Nothinguptop posted links to three good articles, but promotes interpretations almost exactly opposite to what they show.
The Danish study accepts that masks reduce cross-infection rates but doesn’t find that a mask protects its wearer, therefore implying that masks work by source control. The Nature article shows that the Wuhan lockdown was highly effective, but confirms that infection doesn’t always cause symptoms, and found that 0.31% had been infected for a second time.
The Fullfact.org article’s byline is not very well worded, but the article itself correctly interprets the Danish findings. I therefore find myself suspicious of Professor Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, and the Spectator, for their misinterpretation.