you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

You assume first that viruses are "bad" and that they haven't been coexisting with us for millennia and second that masks actually help.

COVID-19 is "bad".

Masks help.

Read the ACTUAL research on the subject

You found a paper for which the margin of error is greater than the effect. Congratulations. We should therefore conclude that there is no effect?

Or should we look around for other papers, or better yet, an analysis of many papers looking at the subject.

TL/DR: mask mandates reduce new diagnoses on a state level by a percent or so. Wearing a mask reduces chance of being infected by something more like 70%.

[–]mongre 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well, kids...we found a shill!

See part VI and best of luck with your shilling, idiot.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/30-facts-you-need-know-covid-cribsheet

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not a shill, and I'm not an idiot. Please don't drag down the discussion.

Zerohedge are spinning those papers quite a lot.

The first one they correctly quote that "no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks", but the central estimate of the analysis still favours mask use, with a risk ratio of 0.78: (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I2 = 30%, p = 0.25)

But the better key is the paper I link to above, especially the note that An increasing number of ecological studies have also provided persuasive evidence that universal mandatory mask wearing policies have been associated with reductions in the number or rate of infections and deaths