Chipthemonk

My whole point is that the scientific consensus on whether masks make a difference at the population level for respiratory illnesses is inconclusive. So why should governments continue mandating them? “Just to be safe” is not a sound argument, especially when the intervention is so drastic against the human condition.

I love showing my face and seeing other people’s’ faces. It angers me that so many people don’t care about faces. I find these folk to be expressively anti-human and it angers me. Masks limit human expression. They dull human life.

The editor in chief was covering her ass due to the political nature of the results. All she attempts to say is “we don’t have conclusive evidence that masks are not effective”

No shit. The review said the same thing. The point is that the large scale study showed no effects of masking. That is, they weren’t sure if they helped or not. That means there is no conclusive evidence, still, after 2 years, that masks are an effective population level intervention.

“But I wear my cloth mask just to be safe.” Okay. You do you. But just know there is no conclusive evidence that it works. Might as well stay in your room, locked for life. Just to be safe.

We are engaging with the review authors with the aim of updating the Plain Language Summary and abstract to make clear that the review looked at whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses.

So, did they change it? (Spoiler alert, No, they didn’t)

You people seriously just don’t get it. One editor in chief wrote this piece. It’s not all of Cochrane. Cochrane is a journal. You clearly don’t understand academic processes. The article was peer reviewed by a panel of experts and written by numerous other experts. The author you are bringing up is solely one person that has an opinion on the matter due to the political ramifications of the article’s findings.

It’s annoying having to explain academic processes to the general public who don’t have a clue.

“I know you are but what am I.” Ok. Maybe try posting something substantive that argues towards something useful.

The responded article says this:

A total of 6 studies were included, involving 4 countries, after a total of 5,178 eligible articles were searched in databases and references.

They literally typed some shit into the journal search database that had that many articles. They didn’t study all of those articles. Their study is founded exclusively from 6 studies. The Cochrane review’s approach is far more comprehensive and goes into considerably more depth in many more studies.

So, maybe you didn’t read the articles? Or maybe you don’t understand population level, public health study methods.

I haven’t been corrected. The farthest anyone has gone was post the editorial comment or highlight that the Cochrane review said “we don’t think masks made any difference but we don’t really know because we need more studies”. Don’t you think it’s pretty damning that, after 2 years, they still don’t know whether masks are effective at the population level? So you are just gonna argue “just to be safe!”

No. I don’t live my life by that mantra. Read Haidt’s The coddling of the American mind.

I’ll happily respond to someone that refutes the Cochrane review in a logical and substantive way.

Yes, they aren’t confident. Isn’t it amazing that that is their results after 2 fucking years and a ton of studies into it? You’d think they could come up with more conclusive evidence that masks work. But they didn’t. The science on masks isn’t resolved. That’s pretty damning in my view.

Surgical masks don’t do shit. They only protect larger particles. Virus shit is far too small for any effectiveness.

To err always on the side of caution, especially when it comes to denying a very human expression (one’s face) is not a good way to live. If we erred on the side of caution for everything, it would be a meaningless life. Life involves risks. It’s very low risk to not wear a mask.

Look at the date you dumb fuck. Then recognize that the Cochrane review is highly respected when it comes to public health science.

You people are ridiculous.

“Stop posting something that, while scientific and deeply rigorous, goes against my deep seated and unchangeable views. I can’t handle it with my weak, feeble mind!”