> Your inability to support your position is noted, thanks.

You're posting something supporting mask usage.

"Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection". Somehow turning that into "masks bad" because it's a low certainty finding (inviting further study to confirm) is silly bullshit.

You may want to learn what "low certainty" means, because it's not "silly bullshit".

"low certainty (our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect could be substantially different from the estimate of the effect);"

Here's the bit you need to pay more attention to: "the true effect could be substantially different from the estimate of the effect);"

But, again, feel free to link to any of your preferred research.

> Here's the bit you need to pay more attention to: "the true effect could be substantially different from the estimate of the effect);"

"We have a low confidence finding that masks work" is not the "high confidence finding masks don't work!" you seem to think it is.

> But, again, feel free to link to any of your preferred research.

I mean, I'd probably just link the one you did, as it supports my point here.

Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23730026. This is not cool to do here, and especially not when it spreads across multiple threads. No more of this please.

Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23730027. This is not cool to do here, and especially not when it spreads across multiple threads. No more of this please.