Unscathed? The Phillipines has had one of the longest mask mandates yet was unable to contain its outbreaks. Japan was unable to avoid its spike. South Korea has had to use other measures because masks weren't enough. And Peru had a mask mandate yet had almost identical (slightly worse) results than Brazil. Now, you can argue that masks (particularly the N95s) might reduce those spikes...but there's no proof of that either way on a macro level. Here's my ultimate take on them, resulting from the behavior of the "experts" on the things. Masks may help if they are used in the ideal. But most cases of trasmission are in the home (where no one is going to use a mask properly all the time including in their sleep) or in institutional settings. The experts can't wear them all the time ideally, less so the public, which is why we don't have a huge impact. On top of that there's the recent airplane study showing that despite distancing and despite mask wearing transmission is occuring on airplanes, in business class. Could you argue yes that's because people sleep or eat?....of course but that's what happens in the home too. Could you argue they reduce the spread? Yup, think you ae probably right and they probably also reduce the viral loads. But they aren't the magic bullet people make it out to be.
What happened in Ventura County is illustrative. The health officer opposed a mask order. He said the science didn't support it, particularly the bandanas, scarfs and homemade masks which have now been shown to be of much less utility. He came under pressure from the supervisors to do "something" particularly as other counties adopted mask orders. He shifted to a recommended instructions. But then he caved when the governor's state wide order occurred. Science!
As I've said if I were in charge I'd do a limited mask order for indoors and on public transport, I'd roll out a mask program and say bandanas and others like it are not enough, and I'd exempt children 10 and under and the severely disabled.
