@feld @freemo

Masks with close to zero efficacy according to a systematic review of 78 studies by Cochrane:

doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006

@vixxo @post @feld

Thank you. Now thst post has been clearly told in direct terms by cochrwin review thst he was wrong and what i and others said about the interpritstion is accurate lets see if he admits he is wrong... i higbly doubt it.

@freemo @vixxo @feld

No, the authors were forced by editors to change it, weren't you supposed to promote academic freedom?

@post @vixxo @feld

Where do you get thst from.. their original version quite clesrly states what i said. Ut people misinterprited what they said to erroneously claim they meant what you said.. so they are changing the wording to be more explicit so people like you dont try and put words in their mouth like you did.

Follow

@post @vixxo @feld

The ironic thibg is the actual wording of the reciew, whicb is usmnarized to "we dont have good studies to draw any solid conclusions about the effectiveness of masks" is itself an antimasker win. But by trying to manipulate the study and claiming it shows masks have 0 effectiveness is so blatantly dishonest tbat you took sometbing tbat could have been a win and instead just used it to discredit yourself.

@freemo @vixxo @feld

Again with this discrediting... it doesn't work with me.

And finally you understood what I meant with "erode".

Also can you please fix the typos before posting? It's hard to read what you write.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.