Reply to Is there a "post-truth" majority in the US?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Is there a "post-truth" majority in the US?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The gold standard Cochrane meta analysis of over 78 rigorous studies showed that mask mandates don’t work.  “The review’s authors found “little to no” evidence that masking at the population level reduced COVID infections, concluding that there is “uncertainty about the effects of face masks.” That result held when the researchers compared surgical masks with N95 masks, and when they compared surgical masks with nothing.” (Tayag)

If you haven’t been following the science, then maybe just sit this discussion out.[/quote]

The Cochrane study was only "gold standard" in terms of limiting itself to randomized controlled trials, it did not not capture real-world effectiveness as well as observational studies, and beyond that it has other flaws, for example it included pre-COVID studies of influenza, which has different transmission dynamics than COVID.  However even that said, the Cochrane review nonetheless still concluded that there was "low to moderate certainty" evidence that masks provide a small reduction in viral respiratory infections based on RCTs - which contradicts your suggestion that masks were totally ineffective and worthless.  Even the Cochrane study can't back that claim up.

There are links above to several other meta-analyses which were not as constrained and flawed as the Cochrane study, which found that effectiveness of masks can be influenced by the timing of implementation, adherence rates, and public compliance. During the COVID-19 pandemic, widespread and consistent mask usage combined with other measures (social distancing, hand hygiene) did in fact play a crucial role.

Studies linked earlier in this thread specifically focused on COVID-19 (not influenza as in the Cochrane study) have shown that masks, particularly in combination with other measures, [i]can[/i] in fact significantly reduce transmission. For instance, the Lancet systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that face masks could result in a large reduction in infection risk.  Likewise, real-world data from Kansas and Germany indicated that mask mandates and usage correlated with reduced infection rates and growth.  Weird that you would want to disregard European studies (Germany) while falsely claiming we are the ones disregarding European studies.
[/quote]

Then why, as someone who is on heavy immunosuppressants, does my doctor instruct me to wear an N95 mask on an airplane? And also why don’t I get Covid on the plane like my DH or kid who don’t wear masks? Why do doctors and nurses wear masks when working? [/quote]

You are never going to convince these wacko anti vaxxers of the importance of vaccines.   They free-load off of the responsible behavior of others that helps to protect them and their families while they trash the scientific method [/quote]

The post PP is responding to says literally nothing about vaccines. That post is about masks, not vaccines. You can’t even understand a simple DCUM post and yet you expect me to believe you can read and absorb scientific studies? What a joke. [/quote]

DP.  Whether dismissing and denying masks or vaccines, it's all part and parcel of the same thing, the same machine trying to destroy public health.  That you can't understand that pretty much shows us that you certainly aren't capable of reading and absorbing scientific studies because you can't even connect the dots or understand the big picture of something as basic as that.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics