(Had to throw that in ;-))
Yes, indeed, I'm not a doctor and the other two individuals are...or at least, one of them still is. Nonetheless, as an ND grad with graduate degrees in engineering and business, I don't consider myself "unarmed" when it comes to a discussion that doesn't require knowledge of anatomy, microbiology, pharmacology, etc...just an ability to read technical reports that deal primarily with accumulated data and numerical findings...as in the MIT Report you mention...which, btw, I read every word of...In addition, I do have the unique benefit of having two close family physicians that I can query if necessary...what's more, one happens to be an Infectious Disease Specialist who had deep knowledge of the nature and dynamics of this COVID-19 pandemic, while the other is a senior Attending Pulmonary/Critical Care (ICU) Doc who deals daily with the treatments (and deaths) of those patients...so, again, I'm not "unarmed" should there be a need for more knowledge when posting here.
Now, on to your points of contention...
As to the credibility of the Oregon doc...it wasn't me who took his license away...it was a board of medical doctors who, after repeated warnings and admonitions over his mis-information comments and behavior regarding best practices for dealing with COVID-19, finally imposed their ultimate penalty...btw, there were complaints as well with his primary practice (Pain and Opioid Treatment), which our other physician, Baron, chooses to put all the onus on...that's his opinion...I'm just going by what was reported.
Am I "gleeful" that the Oregon doc had his license taken away...absolutely not...I'm dismayed that someone with that responsibility was harming his patients and any others that put faith in his statements..shame on him...and I'm comforted by the knowledge that such people can be removed from the medical community. Hopefully, this event serves as a deterrent to others who engage in such behavior.
As for Baron, I 100% accept his declarative statement that he is not only a fellow ND grad, but also a practicing physician...however, in my observations of doctors throughout their training, from Med School, through Residency, Fellowship and Practice, and in consultation with the family docs I mentioned above, I have come to appreciate what they mean when they use terms like "Best Practices" or "Evidence Based Medicine"...and in the case of our subject matter...'Mask Wearing'...it is abundantly clear that Baron does not believe in those "Best Practices" borne of "Evidence Based Medicine" studies...like the MIT Report which includes the following statement...
"Finally, the fact that face mask directives have been more effective than either lockdowns or social distancing in controlling the spread of COVID-19 (22, 33) is consistent with indoor airborne transmission as the primary driver of the global pandemic."
As for that report...once again, I read every word...not sure if you did...and there was no 'caveat' that their findings were dependent on expertly fitted and maintained mask usage...to try and make the above finding turn on such a distinction is nothing more that introducing a "red herring"...but you're free to assert that if you so choose...I'll leave it to the vast majority of reasonable observers. Oh, and just because people don't always use them properly doesn't invalidate the recommendation that they be used...just imagine what would happen to case loads if no one ever used masks...especially in indoor settings...in fact, if you do read the full report, you'll see some numbers that address that circumstance...which is why I roll my eyes every time Baron downplays mask usage.
BTW, you were doing just fine with your comments until you let that little four letter word slip out...kind of gives away the true animus in your reply...hopefully, it was just a momentary lapse...but thanks again for replying and giving me a chance to re-iterate Baron's failings on this matter.