• 0 Posts
  • 40 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 20th, 2023

help-circle
  • The editor in chief was covering her ass due to the political nature of the results. All she attempts to say is “we don’t have conclusive evidence that masks are not effective”

    No shit. The review said the same thing. The point is that the large scale study showed no effects of masking. That is, they weren’t sure if they helped or not. That means there is no conclusive evidence, still, after 2 years, that masks are an effective population level intervention.

    “But I wear my cloth mask just to be safe.” Okay. You do you. But just know there is no conclusive evidence that it works. Might as well stay in your room, locked for life. Just to be safe.



  • You people seriously just don’t get it. One editor in chief wrote this piece. It’s not all of Cochrane. Cochrane is a journal. You clearly don’t understand academic processes. The article was peer reviewed by a panel of experts and written by numerous other experts. The author you are bringing up is solely one person that has an opinion on the matter due to the political ramifications of the article’s findings.

    It’s annoying having to explain academic processes to the general public who don’t have a clue.



  • The responded article says this:

    A total of 6 studies were included, involving 4 countries, after a total of 5,178 eligible articles were searched in databases and references.

    They literally typed some shit into the journal search database that had that many articles. They didn’t study all of those articles. Their study is founded exclusively from 6 studies. The Cochrane review’s approach is far more comprehensive and goes into considerably more depth in many more studies.

    So, maybe you didn’t read the articles? Or maybe you don’t understand population level, public health study methods.


  • I haven’t been corrected. The farthest anyone has gone was post the editorial comment or highlight that the Cochrane review said “we don’t think masks made any difference but we don’t really know because we need more studies”. Don’t you think it’s pretty damning that, after 2 years, they still don’t know whether masks are effective at the population level? So you are just gonna argue “just to be safe!”

    No. I don’t live my life by that mantra. Read Haidt’s The coddling of the American mind.













  • Masking is not an effective solution. Anyone that propagates this shit is just doing it for clicks at this point.

    Have you read the highly respected Cochrane Review? https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses

    Read the review. It’s the most comprehensive post pandemic study from a highly respected journal. They clearly state the following:

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. 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. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated.

    If we can’t settle the issue after a 2 year pandemic, I highly doubt it will ever be settled by science.

    Masking is political theater and is ultimately a matter of expressing your tribe at this point. Alternatively, we could think of people who wear masks today as leaning more heavily towards social humanism and hive mentality (society over the individual), where non masks proponents lean towards liberal humanism (in the sense of freedom of the individual, that is, personal liberty).

    Given that the science is inconclusive about masks, and even suggests that they are not effective, it’s about time that news outlets drop the topic. If you want to wear a mask, then do it. But don’t force anyone else to or suggest that governments should regulate it.

    COVID is over. New shit will come. Masks won’t be the solution.

    Edit: downvotes without any proper rebuttal. Classic tribalism at all cost despite the truth.


  • You are not up to date. The science on whether mass masking is effective is far from settled and the biggest reviews of the literature strongly suggest that masks are not effective in preventing or slowing the spread of respiratory viruses. See below.

    https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses

    The Cochrane Review is highly respected in the medical community. The authors, after a massive study, write the following:

    We are uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses based on the studies we assessed.

    There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. 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. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated.


  • I’m happy to ban religious veils like nun hats (whatever they are called) and burkas/burqas as problematic religious symbols of misogyny. These religious relics are embedded deep into a culture and that part of the culture is misogynistic and discriminatory.

    I don’t know, but I would bet many of the women that “prefer” wearing them prefer it because they believe they would be shunned otherwise from their support system. They “prefer” it in part because they don’t know anything different, and their own community has enforced it as soon as they went through puberty. What does it even mean to prefer something when you haven’t ever experienced not wearing it for an extended time without all your local support group shunning you? Is that really a preference?

    But you can’t tell me these things are always comfortable. They look miserably uncomfortable in many situations and must cause a lot of undue heat and such. But the culture that forced these women to wear them runs deep. That part of culture needs to be eradicated.