https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/unintendedpregnancy/p...
If we had no other method, then it might be reasonable to call it effective, in comparison to doing nothing. Given that better options exist, it is not very reasonable to call it effective without qualification.
If someone chooses to intentionally reduce a conversation to an "effective/ineffective" dichotomy to deliberately mislead or obscure conversations, then it might be disinformation. Disinformation can consist entirely of factual statements.
Actually, a good case for banning ALL discussion of mask effectiveness on Twitter as being disinformation, since the character limit basically forces turning discussion into simplified dichotomy.
How are you supposed to tell which is which without reading minds?
This simply moves the argument from "accurate vs concise" to "concise for good reasons vs concise for bad reasons"
You certainly don’t win senate elections by telling your constituents that they’re wrong. You start with the preconceived views of your constituents and work your way backwards to an argument.
Or is it disinformation to say, "the rythmn method is an effective form of birth control"?