In fact, the reduction in deaths that's cited here as the main outcome is a direct result of the relative risk (0.65) that the authors found for mask-use compared to no mask-use when aggregating together studies on maskspic.twitter.com/2E9Vl8biHE
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
In fact, the reduction in deaths that's cited here as the main outcome is a direct result of the relative risk (0.65) that the authors found for mask-use compared to no mask-use when aggregating together studies on maskspic.twitter.com/2E9Vl8biHE
So, they predict 500k deaths in the US by Feb 2021, but if 95% of people wear masks in public, this goes down by just under 35%
But is this reasonable? The study uses the results from two previous systematic reviews that almost exclusively looked at data from SARS and MERS for mask-wearing. Are studies like the below ones reflective of the risk of transmission for people in public for COVID-19?pic.twitter.com/neUI9nztOF
Even if we accept that, on average, face masks will prevent 35% of infections in healthcare professionals from MERS/SARS and influenza, what in the world does that mean for COVID-19?
Given that the main result is a direct consequence of this assumption for mask-wearing, I think it's worth noting how flimsy the evidence is!
Anyway, I suspect that 95% mask-wearing in public would have a relatively small impact on the eventual death toll from COVID-19 given that most transmission happens in non-public places such as workplaces, schools, universities, and at home
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.