That’s an excellent post, but I think it could have been taken further. After concluding that there’s no confidence either way, the rational thing to do is calculate risk and follow the precautionary principle. Masks may or may not work, but there’s no risk in wearing one.
-
-
-
That was the obvious starting point of the argument; it had just not dawned on me how 'experts' could end up giving systematically bad advice.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This media may contain sensitive material. Learn moreThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
ja well, the ol' 'in the absence of data, use common sense'. Straightforward with ibuprofen when there is paracetamol, and masks (if there are masks)...Though I am wildly curious to see what public health will do w/ the non-common-sense finding that smoking's OR w/ C19 is ...<1.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
100k deaths to change opinion
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yep
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There's no evidence of an inversed correlation between WHO's "no evidence" and actual evidence.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I guess in this domain "no evidence" means "based on existing knowledge, we do not know whether". They probably just don't know. But this "no evidence" phrase is misleading.
-
They told doctors to continue using ibuprofen, the public not to wear masks, doctors not to try hydroxycholoroquine, cruiseship passengers not to worry. They don't understand absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Their half education made them worse than common sense.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.