This is a smart explanation of how the "masks don't work" message spread & why we know masks do work (and so does flossing) even if there aren't randomized controlled trials to prove it https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-went-wrong-with-a-highly-publicized-covid-mask-analysis/
@laurahelmuth
The SA article's subhead is direct and to the point:
"The Cochrane Library, a trusted source of health information, misled the public by prioritizing rigor over reality"
Next question: Why would anyone continue to trust The Cochran Library with its history of misleading the public?
@ColinOatley but it doesn't sound like it mislead the public here.
It sounds like it did fine work, but some figured in the public misinterpreted what it said.
The outfit can hardly be blamed for the strawmen others set up to argue.
@laurahelmuth
@volkris @laurahelmuth
Per the story in SA: "The study's lead author, Tom Jefferson of the University of Oxford, promoted the misleading interpretation. When asked about different kinds of masks, including N95s, he declared, “Makes no difference—none of it.” In another interview, he called mask mandates scientifically baseless."
@ColinOatley AFAIK that's not misleading; it's what the study flat out found.
The inclusion of those observations did nothing to change the conclusion of the study, making no difference.
