Re:An analysis of studies pertaining to masks from 1978 to 2023
by standardUser on Friday May 24, 2024 @04:19PM
(#40470144)
With language like that, there's no way to not see this as a hit piece.
Re:An analysis of studies pertaining to masks from 1978 to 2023
by admissionsguy on Friday May 24, 2024 @06:26PM
(#40471039)
Yea, a hit piece on bad science
Re:An analysis of studies pertaining to masks from 1978 to 2023
by majormajor on Friday May 24, 2024 @05:22PM
(#40470594)
Yes, I noted that the authors are largely focused on study quality vs actual conclusions about which sorts of masks are what level of effective.
And critiquing sloppy science is very necessary. But it's being extended by many to be "masks not useful, full stop" despite largely being about "most studies suck." And the phrasings chosen by the authors make it look like that mis-read/extension is an effect they desire.
> “Conclusions and Relevance MMWR publications pertaining to masks drew positive conclusions about mask effectiveness over 75% of the time despite only 30% testing masks and <15% having statistically significant results. No studies were randomized, yet over half drew causal conclusions. The level of evidence generated was low and the conclusions drawn were most often unsupported by the data. Our findings raise concern about the reliability of the journal for informing health policy.”
I watch Dr Prasad on YouTube and he is pretty interesting IMO. He’s an oncologist but spends a lot of time analyzing medical studies.