5 ms·

While all of this may be true, the science around all of this is much less settled than the tone of your comment makes it sound.

dougmwne 6y ago
Could you link to some evidence for your medical claims? here is mine: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
- DanBC 6y ago
  Here's my link, from people working to promote evidence-based medicine: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/ https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-... From your link: > (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty That "low certainty" comes from GRADE. Low certainty in GRADE means "The true effect might be markedly different from the estimated effect". Masks may be very much better, or very much worse, than they estimate. The Interpretation section says this: > Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. Which suggests to me that they want more and better evidence. The end of the paper says this: > Our comprehensive systematic review provides the best available information on three simple and common interventions to combat the immediate threat of COVID-19, while new evidence on pharmacological treatments, vaccines, and other personal protective strategies is being generated. Physical distancing of at least 1 m is strongly associated with protection, but distances of up to 2 m might be more effective. Although direct evidence is limited, the optimum use of face masks, in particular N95 or similar respirators in health-care settings and 12–16-layer cotton or surgical masks in the community, could depend on contextual factors; action is needed at all levels to address the paucity of better evidence. Eye protection might provide additional benefits. Globally collaborative and well conducted studies, including randomised trials, of different personal protective strategies are needed regardless of the challenges, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence could be considered to inform interim guidance. These sentences make me think the evidence isn't as strong as lots of people claim it is: > while new evidence on [...] other personal protective strategies is being generated. > Although direct evidence is limited > action is needed at all levels to address the paucity of better evidence.
  - nickthemagicman 6y ago
    Even in the 'evidence' the poster you're responding to says there's low evidence of effectiveness of mask usage.
    - DanBC 6y ago
      Please re-read my post. That's what I'm saying: that masks may work, but we have low quality evidence. We need more evidence, we need better evidence. dougmwne appears to be saying that masks work and that we know they work, but the link they provided doesn't support that claim.
      - nickthemagicman 6y ago
        No I was agreeing with you. Was pointing out that 'evidence' that the person you were replying to presented, said the certainty was 'low'.
- nickthemagicman 6y ago
  You clearly didn't read this paper because it literally says there's low certainty of mask usage being effective in table 2 and in the findings section.
- _-___________-_ 6y ago
  The article you linked doesn't provide any evidence for your medical claims -- in fact, it provides support for my position. Furthermore, the claim I'm making (masks may work, but there's very little good-quality evidence that they do) is much softer than the claim you're making (masks work, even though there's very little good-quality evidence that they do). It really bothers me that a medical device has become something so political and so disconnected from evidence-based science that I need to say this, but: for what it's worth, I wear a mask when near other people, both because they may be effective, and because the people I'm near may believe that they are and may thus feel safer seeing me wear it. I can feel that the evidence is very weak and yet still do that.

dougmwne 6y ago

Could you link to some evidence for your medical claims? here is mine: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

DanBC 6y ago
Here's my link, from people working to promote evidence-based medicine: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/ https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-... From your link: > (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty That "low certainty" comes from GRADE. Low certainty in GRADE means "The true effect might be markedly different from the estimated effect". Masks may be very much better, or very much worse, than they estimate. The Interpretation section says this: > Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. Which suggests to me that they want more and better evidence. The end of the paper says this: > Our comprehensive systematic review provides the best available information on three simple and common interventions to combat the immediate threat of COVID-19, while new evidence on pharmacological treatments, vaccines, and other personal protective strategies is being generated. Physical distancing of at least 1 m is strongly associated with protection, but distances of up to 2 m might be more effective. Although direct evidence is limited, the optimum use of face masks, in particular N95 or similar respirators in health-care settings and 12–16-layer cotton or surgical masks in the community, could depend on contextual factors; action is needed at all levels to address the paucity of better evidence. Eye protection might provide additional benefits. Globally collaborative and well conducted studies, including randomised trials, of different personal protective strategies are needed regardless of the challenges, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence could be considered to inform interim guidance. These sentences make me think the evidence isn't as strong as lots of people claim it is: > while new evidence on [...] other personal protective strategies is being generated. > Although direct evidence is limited > action is needed at all levels to address the paucity of better evidence.
- nickthemagicman 6y ago
  Even in the 'evidence' the poster you're responding to says there's low evidence of effectiveness of mask usage.
  - DanBC 6y ago
    Please re-read my post. That's what I'm saying: that masks may work, but we have low quality evidence. We need more evidence, we need better evidence. dougmwne appears to be saying that masks work and that we know they work, but the link they provided doesn't support that claim.
    - nickthemagicman 6y ago
      No I was agreeing with you. Was pointing out that 'evidence' that the person you were replying to presented, said the certainty was 'low'.
nickthemagicman 6y ago
You clearly didn't read this paper because it literally says there's low certainty of mask usage being effective in table 2 and in the findings section.
_-___________-_ 6y ago
The article you linked doesn't provide any evidence for your medical claims -- in fact, it provides support for my position. Furthermore, the claim I'm making (masks may work, but there's very little good-quality evidence that they do) is much softer than the claim you're making (masks work, even though there's very little good-quality evidence that they do). It really bothers me that a medical device has become something so political and so disconnected from evidence-based science that I need to say this, but: for what it's worth, I wear a mask when near other people, both because they may be effective, and because the people I'm near may believe that they are and may thus feel safer seeing me wear it. I can feel that the evidence is very weak and yet still do that.