> The Cochrane review is underwhelming because it is mediocre I would consider the article you're referencing less than mediocre. "The Cochrane review didn't s

> The Cochrane review is underwhelming because it is mediocre I would consider the article you're referencing less than mediocre. "The Cochrane review didn't show what we expected it would show because their standards are too high." They are not conflating "absence of evidence" -- readers are. I think it's odd how often people reference the Bangladesh study as evidence supporting masks, apparently without having read it. Ultimately, I think masks probably do have a statistically significant benefit. I also think that if the rigorous studies (yes, I mean mostly RCTs) to date have been underpowered to show this benefit, that the effect size is likely to be small enough to make the costs of bickering potentially nullify those benefits. I still wear an N95 every shift.