Thank you. Back in Feb I located a few pubmed papers mask research that were somewhat more mixed than I think this summary indicated. Here are some of the ones I found along those lines. Only one of these was referenced and one is later work from same.https://twitter.com/stevesi/status/1241777944202104832?s=20 …
-
-
I think the biggest misunderstanding, again, is that it is not "does it protect individuals from getting infected" (most previous studies) but how much will it reduce R(eff) at the community level given X level of blocking and Y level of compliance. Which we model.
-
I'll just say that every week there is more evidence, new papers and new case studies. They all point in the same direction. Final paper will be even stronger. I'm a pragmatist; if there was some reason to think otherwise, I'd be very open about it. Cheers!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
All I said was you were part of a survey paper and a half dozen recent relevant papers escaped mention. To which you said you asked a different question for which there was no research yet reached a conclusion to which I suggested maybe there was more relevance than indicated.
-
I think again, I didn't say there was no research, but not the kind of conclusive study we would need, but I think we will have some from this event (regression-discontinuity designs for mask adoption). We really did not ignore relevant papers. Not the ones you cite either!
- Show replies
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.