4 ms·

Don't worry, I've read it. Staff at Johns Hopkins have also produced this summary: https://ncrc.jhsph.edu/research/the-impact-of-community-masking-on-covid-19-

Don't worry, I've read it. Staff at Johns Hopkins have also produced this summary: https://ncrc.jhsph.edu/research/the-impact-of-community-masking-on-covid-19-a-cluster-randomized-trial-in-bangladesh/ https://ncrc.jhsph.edu/research/the-impact-of-community-mask... >The outcome measure– the proportion of individuals who reported symptoms and who tested positive for antibodies– is a poor proxy for actual SARS-CoV-2 infections during the study period. Moreover, only 40% of those reporting SARS-CoV-2 symptoms consented to providing a blood sample for antibody testing. If there were systematic differences between intervention and control villages in the proportion of antibody-positive individuals among the >60% of symptomatic individuals who were not tested, the results would be biased. >It is unclear whether the serological assay used to assess the primary outcome was validated in the population under study, or when serological measurements were taken relative to symptom onset. Furthermore, using symptomatic seroprevalence as an outcome means that authors could not distinguish between effects on infections and on symptom severity. Another key limitation is that the persons recording the behavior data could not be blinded to whether the village was a control or intervention arm, leaving open the possibility that data recorders could have been influenced by knowledge of the study arm.

ceejayoz 5y ago
Ooof, I think you over-skimmed. Did you read the "Our take" summary up top of that page? > However, the study provides evidence that interventions promoting mask use can reduce community SARS-CoV-2 transmission even when fewer than half of community members wear masks. If the results are valid, they imply that near-universal mask wearing would be associated with much larger reductions in transmission. and the conclusion: > This study is the largest and best-designed randomized controlled trial to date of a realistic non-pharmaceutical intervention on SARS-CoV-2 transmission.
- thenewnormal 5y ago
  The largest and best-designed trial so far can only show a small reduction in (badly measured) Covid cases? And we're supposed to extrapolate this to universal masking and imply it could almost wipe out Covid? Ok. Given that most Western places actually have incredibly large adherence to mask mandates (at least double the best-case 40% measured in this study), and despite the frequent (online) decrying of "anti-mask covidiots are killing us", surely performing this extrapolation would indicate that we should have almost non-existent Covid case numbers, and especially as practically everyone is vaccinated?
- thenewnormal 5y ago
  Downvoted and flagged. An excellent rebuttal!
- thenewnormal 5y ago
  Only flagged this time. Progress, I suppose. Tell me - if mask wearing at 40% adherence produced some positive results, why are case rates across the Western world so high? Looking around me, I would estimate mask adherence to be around 95%, where I live the over-18 vaccination rate is somewhere near 90%, yet case rates are nearly as high as they've ever been and are climbing. It's as if those two measures do very little to control transmission, and the best we can hope for is that the vaccine stops the vulnerable from dying.

ceejayoz 5y ago

Ooof, I think you over-skimmed. Did you read the "Our take" summary up top of that page? > However, the study provides evidence that interventions promoting mask use can reduce community SARS-CoV-2 transmission even when fewer than half of community members wear masks. If the results are valid, they imply that near-universal mask wearing would be associated with much larger reductions in transmission. and the conclusion: > This study is the largest and best-designed randomized controlled trial to date of a realistic non-pharmaceutical intervention on SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

thenewnormal 5y ago
The largest and best-designed trial so far can only show a small reduction in (badly measured) Covid cases? And we're supposed to extrapolate this to universal masking and imply it could almost wipe out Covid? Ok. Given that most Western places actually have incredibly large adherence to mask mandates (at least double the best-case 40% measured in this study), and despite the frequent (online) decrying of "anti-mask covidiots are killing us", surely performing this extrapolation would indicate that we should have almost non-existent Covid case numbers, and especially as practically everyone is vaccinated?
thenewnormal 5y ago
Downvoted and flagged. An excellent rebuttal!
thenewnormal 5y ago
Only flagged this time. Progress, I suppose. Tell me - if mask wearing at 40% adherence produced some positive results, why are case rates across the Western world so high? Looking around me, I would estimate mask adherence to be around 95%, where I live the over-18 vaccination rate is somewhere near 90%, yet case rates are nearly as high as they've ever been and are climbing. It's as if those two measures do very little to control transmission, and the best we can hope for is that the vaccine stops the vulnerable from dying.