2 ms·
The only real way to judge this is by measuring experts, ie. hospital staff. They are well trained and you can expect consistent results. Any studies that empl
by blindriver 4y ago
The only real way to judge this is by measuring experts, ie. hospital staff. They are well trained and you can expect consistent results.
Any studies that employ the population at large is going to devolve to nothingness because they won't be consistent and eventually over long periods of time, they will slip up and given how contagious COVID is, they will get infected. Then people can turn to the study and say "SEE! THEY DON'T WORK!"
If the study is focusing on the question "Does it make sense to tell the general public to wash and wear a mask?" I think that's a different question than whether or not masks and hand washing protect people.
- taeric 4y agoTroubling here, I don't know a single medical staffer that did not get covid. So... I'm not sure this would give different results. This is dangerously close to the arguments that you can write safe C code. Logically, that is perfectly true. Empirically, it is a non-sequitur.
- blindriver 4y agoIf even experts can't avoid getting COVID, it means that regardless of how effective masks are, it's impossible to avoid COVID over a long time period. So the effectiveness of masks is moot, because the difficulty in its perfect use is too high.
- taeric 4y agoI wouldn't take it quite that far. Given enough time behind the wheel, everyone will crash a car, after all. Doesn't mean we can't take measures that greatly reduce the severity and rate of crashes.