8 ms·

Show me the science. We have lots of RCTs on mask wearing (mostly in healthcare professionals) and they struggle to find a benefit. People should wear masks,

by DanBC 6y ago

Show me the science. We have lots of RCTs on mask wearing (mostly in healthcare professionals) and they struggle to find a benefit. People should wear masks, masks may help, but it's unhelpful when people misrepresent the strength of the evidence.

soneca 6y ago
I think this article does a good job properly presenting what evidence we have: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
Sure, but does the science here matter? Is wearing a mask, which might reduce the spread, and might save lives, really that much of a burden, that you won't do it even though it might be a good idea? I say, do it anyways, I'll wait patiently for the science at literally any point in the future. If it turns out masks, statistically, do nothing, then I will be no worse off for trying.
- DanBC 6y ago
  I mean, I even said "people should wear masks, masks may help". But when we're trying to persuade as many people to wear masks as possible it's really unhelpful for people to make dishonest or misleading claims about the effectiveness of masks. A message of "we think masks work, and here's why" is more persuasive than "masks definitely work and you're an idiot if you think otherwise" because it's very easy to find good quality studies that don't show a benefit to mask wearing.
  - xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
    I agree with you, but I don't think it is a practical approach -- almost no one actually cares about the science. We're all supposed to wash our hands after going to the bathroom, especially if we're preparing meals for others -- California makes this very clear with their mandatory signage! But do I need to see the science behind it? I've never seen any hard data on hand-washing -- and yet...
Accacin 6y ago
There's a few links in this thread, maybe you should read them. > but it's unhelpful when people misrepresent the strength of the evidence What exactly are your credentials, and why should I trust you?
- DanBC 6y ago
  I'm not asking you to trust my credentials, which is why I'm asking for links to the science.
jk700 6y ago
> We have lots of RCTs on mask wearing (mostly in healthcare professionals) and they struggle to find a benefit. This is false. If you look around and read actual studies, not demand other people to do it for you and not cherry pick garbage studies, you'll find even real life "experiments" of healthcare workers in the US during COVID-19 not wearing masks with rapidly rising number of COVID-19 cases then mandated to wear masks with subsequent rapid drop of cases. What you won't find though is studies supporting the assertion that sick person wearing a mask protects others, not the wearer. Those are the studies that show little to no benefit and always did actually. You protect others with a mask by not catching the virus yourself, it's a second order effect.
- DanBC 6y ago
  I've read the actual studies. They don't show benefits. > not demand other people to do it for you and not cherry pick garbage studies, The reason I ask you to provide the studies you think are persuasive is so we avoid the tedious discussion about cherry picking. I cannot cherry pick articles that you supply. If you want my link: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Lancet is a reputable high impact publication. The paper is peer reviewed. > Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] −10·2%, 95% CI −11·5 to −7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; pinteraction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). For masking they find only "low certainty" evidence, and that's with N95s or 12 to 16 layers of cotton. (Most people are wearing 3 to 4 layers). Low certainty comes from GRADE and means "The true effect might be markedly different from the estimated effect" -- masks may be markedly more, or markedly less, effective than they found. > What you won't find though is studies supporting the assertion that sick person wearing a mask protects others, not the wearer. Those are the studies that show little to no benefit and always did actually. You protect others with a mask by not catching the virus yourself, it's a second order effect. Oh-ho, so here we see a clearly shifted goalpost. Everyone else in this thread is saying that the science is obvious and that you wear a mask to prevent your infection from spreading to other people. So, does the science support "source control" or not?

by DanBC 6y ago

soneca 6y ago

I think this article does a good job properly presenting what evidence we have: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8

xyzzy_plugh 6y ago

Sure, but does the science here matter? Is wearing a mask, which might reduce the spread, and might save lives, really that much of a burden, that you won't do it even though it might be a good idea? I say, do it anyways, I'll wait patiently for the science at literally any point in the future. If it turns out masks, statistically, do nothing, then I will be no worse off for trying.

DanBC 6y ago
I mean, I even said "people should wear masks, masks may help". But when we're trying to persuade as many people to wear masks as possible it's really unhelpful for people to make dishonest or misleading claims about the effectiveness of masks. A message of "we think masks work, and here's why" is more persuasive than "masks definitely work and you're an idiot if you think otherwise" because it's very easy to find good quality studies that don't show a benefit to mask wearing.
- xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
  I agree with you, but I don't think it is a practical approach -- almost no one actually cares about the science. We're all supposed to wash our hands after going to the bathroom, especially if we're preparing meals for others -- California makes this very clear with their mandatory signage! But do I need to see the science behind it? I've never seen any hard data on hand-washing -- and yet...

Accacin 6y ago

There's a few links in this thread, maybe you should read them. > but it's unhelpful when people misrepresent the strength of the evidence What exactly are your credentials, and why should I trust you?

DanBC 6y ago
I'm not asking you to trust my credentials, which is why I'm asking for links to the science.

jk700 6y ago

> We have lots of RCTs on mask wearing (mostly in healthcare professionals) and they struggle to find a benefit. This is false. If you look around and read actual studies, not demand other people to do it for you and not cherry pick garbage studies, you'll find even real life "experiments" of healthcare workers in the US during COVID-19 not wearing masks with rapidly rising number of COVID-19 cases then mandated to wear masks with subsequent rapid drop of cases. What you won't find though is studies supporting the assertion that sick person wearing a mask protects others, not the wearer. Those are the studies that show little to no benefit and always did actually. You protect others with a mask by not catching the virus yourself, it's a second order effect.

DanBC 6y ago
I've read the actual studies. They don't show benefits. > not demand other people to do it for you and not cherry pick garbage studies, The reason I ask you to provide the studies you think are persuasive is so we avoid the tedious discussion about cherry picking. I cannot cherry pick articles that you supply. If you want my link: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Lancet is a reputable high impact publication. The paper is peer reviewed. > Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] −10·2%, 95% CI −11·5 to −7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; pinteraction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). For masking they find only "low certainty" evidence, and that's with N95s or 12 to 16 layers of cotton. (Most people are wearing 3 to 4 layers). Low certainty comes from GRADE and means "The true effect might be markedly different from the estimated effect" -- masks may be markedly more, or markedly less, effective than they found. > What you won't find though is studies supporting the assertion that sick person wearing a mask protects others, not the wearer. Those are the studies that show little to no benefit and always did actually. You protect others with a mask by not catching the virus yourself, it's a second order effect. Oh-ho, so here we see a clearly shifted goalpost. Everyone else in this thread is saying that the science is obvious and that you wear a mask to prevent your infection from spreading to other people. So, does the science support "source control" or not?