Syag, I saw some serious academic anti-maskers at Cato referring to the same Bangladesh study we discussed here as a more authoritative one among a long list. They report it though in a distorted way, like “only 0.0x reduction”, when relative reduction is 20% … I emailed a polite technical message to one of the authors with a PhD and a Harvard affiliation but did not hear back.
Based on this and other similar readings, I dare to say if you were reading secondary sources that quote scientific articles in a serious-looking way on such a hot topic, you may be fooled (either way, depending what you are reading).