4 ms·

According to the study itself, the evidence is _not_ clear: > Although the point estimates for cloth masks suggests that they reduce risk, the confidence limit

According to the study itself, the evidence is _not_ clear: > Although the point estimates for cloth masks suggests that they reduce risk, the confidence limits include both an effect size similar to surgical masks and no effect at all

mike00632 5y ago
You're making a mistake by drawing conclusions that masks aren't effective. Pointing to one study which has non-significant data means you shouldn't draw any conclusion at all from it.
- ZephyrBlu 5y ago
  I'm not drawing conclusions from that study, I'm pointing out that the study which the OP used to say "the science is pretty clear" and "the evidence is clear" does not reach the same conclusion as OP. Your comment should really be directed at the OP, not me.
  - mike00632 5y ago
    You took ONE study and your claim is that the science is not clear on masks. You used that study as evidence for your conclusion. That is not how science works. One study not having enough data to support the hypothesis doesn't mean that the hypothesis is wrong or that ALL studies are unclear.
relaxing 5y ago
You're cherry-picking the results for cloth masks. The study found surgical masks do better. And I assume by now everyone knows N95 are superior. And anyway, it's unlikely the true effect would land squarely on zero.
- ZephyrBlu 5y ago
  I'm not cherry picking. This whole thread is related to mask mandates. No one is mandating N95 masks. All the discussion around masks in this context is about cloth masks. Even if it was related to masks in general, very few people are wearing N95 masks for protection. Cloth masks are far more relevant.
  - relaxing 5y ago
    I have no idea where you’re coming from. The word cloth does not appear in the Reason article. You’re just making vague assertions. Masks work, it’s settled. I don’t need to point out the logical fallacy in “some masks aren’t as good, therefore mask mandates don’t work.”
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]

mike00632 5y ago

You're making a mistake by drawing conclusions that masks aren't effective. Pointing to one study which has non-significant data means you shouldn't draw any conclusion at all from it.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago
I'm not drawing conclusions from that study, I'm pointing out that the study which the OP used to say "the science is pretty clear" and "the evidence is clear" does not reach the same conclusion as OP. Your comment should really be directed at the OP, not me.
- mike00632 5y ago
  You took ONE study and your claim is that the science is not clear on masks. You used that study as evidence for your conclusion. That is not how science works. One study not having enough data to support the hypothesis doesn't mean that the hypothesis is wrong or that ALL studies are unclear.

relaxing 5y ago

You're cherry-picking the results for cloth masks. The study found surgical masks do better. And I assume by now everyone knows N95 are superior. And anyway, it's unlikely the true effect would land squarely on zero.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago
I'm not cherry picking. This whole thread is related to mask mandates. No one is mandating N95 masks. All the discussion around masks in this context is about cloth masks. Even if it was related to masks in general, very few people are wearing N95 masks for protection. Cloth masks are far more relevant.
- relaxing 5y ago
  I have no idea where you’re coming from. The word cloth does not appear in the Reason article. You’re just making vague assertions. Masks work, it’s settled. I don’t need to point out the logical fallacy in “some masks aren’t as good, therefore mask mandates don’t work.”
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]