@detachedspork I am a massive fan of masks, i think, like reading glasses, they are a wee minor miracle, a wee bit of paper over your gob and lives can be saved! Miracle!
🤣 I might use that one: “Why are you afraid of a wee bit of paper over your gob?”
Interesting that the first “face diaper” troll I get on Mastodon is from an instance that is “A Mastodon instance for scholars in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and all yearning to learn.”
Sigh… the honeymoon was nice while it lasted.
…and of course it’s wonderful to know there’s no algorithm maliciously amplifying this voice; my condolences to anyone who has them in their local feed.
@DavidM_yeg @ritawild @detachedspork
There is a beauty to the randomness of the #fediverse that breaks the darkness of the echo chambers of cults, social conformity and politics. It spreads the light of science and facts, like this major study on this topic:
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full
@DavidM_yeg @ritawild @detachedspork
Cherry picking bits and pieces of a meta analysis is not "reading".
Why didn't you cherry pick this part for example:
> The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.
Since you like "reading" so much, I would like to share with you two more research publications on this subject:
- Respiratory Performance Offered by N95 Respirators and Surgical Masks: Human Subject Evaluation with NaCl Aerosol Representing Bacterial and Viral Particle Size Range
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/52/3/177/312528?login=false
>Most of the tested N95 respirators and surgical masks in this study were observed to perform at their worst against particles approximately between 0.04 and 0.2 μm, which includes the sizes of coronavirus and influenza virus.
- The Foegen effect
A mechanism by which facemasks contribute to the COVID-19 case fatality rate
> This study revealed that wearing facemasks might impose a great risk on individuals, which would not be mitigated by a reduction in the infection rate. The use of facemasks, therefore, might be unfit, if not contraindicated, as an epidemiologic intervention against COVID-19.
@ritawild @detachedspork @voidabyss
Here’s an excellent and thorough critique of the study: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1630000803141255169.html
Or tldr/ don’t have the patience, try this:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/27/dont-believe-those-who-claim-science-proves-masks-dont-work
@DavidM_yeg @ritawild @detachedspork
Thanks, it's always good to read counter arguments to a scientific publication from a storyteller fact twister journalist.
- The overnight coronavirus expert
https://fortune.com/2020/08/10/the-overnight-coronavirus-expert/
https://www.removepaywall.com
- What does Covid-19 mean for expertise? The case of Tomas Pueyo
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/ihuman/what-does-covid-19-mean-expertise-case-tomas-pueyo
Here is a fair and balanced tldr critique of the Cochrane study from a medical expert 👇
➡ Drop Public Mask Mandates Without Misgivings
Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Concludes Masks "Make Little or No Difference" in Spread of Viral Respiratory Illnesses
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/drop-public-mask-mandates-without?utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fmask&utm_medium=reader2
- Dr. Peter A McCullough, MD, MPH
Citations 67165
h-index 122
i10-index 492
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=LzqEaOkAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao
If you want to rely an expert opinion on this subject make sure they have at least a publication h-index above 10.
@voidabyss @ritawild @detachedspork
“Cherry picking bits and pieces of a meta analysis is not “reading”.
I wasn’t cherry picking, I was quoting the *authors’ own conclusions*
🙄