I know that VOA is a serious broadcaster, but I find quite strange that they entitled their article (
https://www.voanews.com/science-health/coronavirus-outbreak/not-just-coronavirus-asians-have-worn-face-masks-decades ) "Not Just Coronavirus: Asians Have Worn Face Masks for Decades"
Making such a generalization is not really good journalism, IMO. To say "Asians" in title and then saying: "That’s because Asians, especially in Japan, China and Taiwan, have worn masks for a host of cultural and environmental reasons, including non-medical ones, since at least the 1950s."
Asia is not comprised of 3 countries, but of 48. 48.
I would rather rely on an article able to nuance: "For many of these countries, mask-wearing was a cultural norm even before the coronavirus outbreak."
-https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52015486
Or on an article way more precise, like the following: "Porter le masque ou non, telle est la question en Corée du Sud" including this sentence "Or, contrairement aux idées reçues, le port du masque n’est pas une habitude de longue date au pays du Matin calme."
https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1692773/port-masque-coree-du-sud-coronavirus-covid-19 I am sorry for the francophone source. But if this issue really interests you, you can copy-paste in Google translator the whole article or just the above quote (excerpt). The signification is: "Contrary to popular belief, wearing a mask has not been a long-standing habit in the land of the Morning Calm. " (Land of the Morning Calm is a knickname for South Korea). By the way "Radio-Canada" (CBC in English) is the equivalent of the BBC in the UK.
ALSO: Culture is neither monolithic nor sacred, nor permanent. Indeed, there is probably nothing as fluid as culture. "‘Culture is everywhere, under continuous creation – fluid, interconnected, diffusing, interpenetrating, homogenising, diverging, hegemonising, resisting, reformulating, creolising, open rather than closed, partial rather than total, crossing it’s own boundaries, persisting where we don’t expect it to, and changing where we do.’ Sanjek, R. (1991) ‘The ethnographic Present’
I say that because we should be mature enough to see when something needs to change. We cannot just say: "We can't do this because it is not in our culture" or "It is easier or natural for them because it is in their culture".
If we see that it is logical to wear mask (even if it is "just" to save other's life, not ours), then we have the duty to do efforts to wear them. This is a very small effort compared to what was asked from our grand-parent (to give their life at war). Come on! Just staying at home, washing our hands (with running water right in our kitchen), physical distancing and wearing a masking when making our grocery for the moment.
We should be able to do these.