I thought a lot about this, and am happy to follow through the challenge. Are you touching the outside? Better it's outside the mask than on your face, obviously no? Touching the inside? Well, it's your germs and that's exactly what we are trying to protect the world from.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @boriquagato
What is the scenario in which a no-mask situation is worse for the wearer than a mask scenario in the community? I cannot come up with realistic ones, and this is what I thought about most because that's a real argument against masks.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @boriquagato
I am pretty certain they do not lead to false sense of security. False sense of security is rarely ever found as an important factor for anything but for this we now have data.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @boriquagato
I’m really going to disagree here. What you’re outlining is a common claim that is almost completely debunked empirically. Safety gains are so much larger than any measurable increased risk taking that they are barely noise if that.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @boriquagato
We have actual reviews of helmet use, which I review in the paper that’s a pre-print above and they overwhelmingly show the benefits of safety devices greatly outweigh anything you can posit as increased risk.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
This holds even for risky recreational things like high-risk sports, where the risk is part of the point. For consumer safety devices like seatbelts and motorcycle helmets, the data is unequivocal and shows no increased risk whatsoever from the safety device. Completely opposite.
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.