1) The only RCT we have found no statistical effect, and at best a weak effect for masks (which is what I claimed). 2) It's on mask proponents to prove masks work. We don't assume they do and force someone to prove they don't. That's not how science works.
-
-
You can't design a RTC for population-level effects of mask wearing. The idea you need RTC before creating public health policy is crazy. What RTC do they have for travel bans? None, so you are saying Trump needed an RTC to justify restricting travel. It's just absurd logic.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I didn't say we needed an RCT before using masks. But we do need one before we can really say they work. This is basic science. Your "faith" in masks is no different than the faith religious people have in their God. Like you, they can marshal all sorts of observational evidence.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
We still don't have a RCT for travel bans, but the data does suggest it slows the introduction of disease. We can justify the policy. It's thin evidence cloth masks protect the wearer, but they are likely good source control from the evidence. That's good enough for the policy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
1) Travel bans logically make sense: you are physically stopping the virus from entering. And they also don't work once you have enough introductions. 2) The same is not true for masks. We don't know they block anything. All the theoretical data is based on droplets - it's wrong.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @therealrthorat @wowwowza and
3) Masks also have downsides in that they can change behavior. The theoretical data cannot assess this. 4) Travel bans can change behavior too! Announced bans led to people fleeing before the ban, which likely increased spread. These things are not so easy.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
It is foolish to create theoretical changed before erases more straight forward theoretical advantages without a study demonstrating a neutral or negative correlation. Clearly you want policy execution/messaging to minimize counteractive responses to policy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Difficult to parse your tweet, but it sounds like you are saying we should assume there are no downsides to an intervention until someone has proven they exist? Count me out of that train.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I'm saying you have to get one step removed from the actual policy and theoretical effect without any evidence. We know masks would likely be good source control. We don't know if that would make people feel safer to be closer or remind them to keep their distance.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
"We know masks would likely be good source control." No, we don't. We have theoretical data that rests on assumptions that appear to be false. And we have lots of historical data that points to null result.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Ryan, can you drop me from the thread? There's so much actual scientific work at this point that masks work that I am not going to respond to individual tweeters. We don't just have theoretical data, scientists have published so many excellent papers that I have lost count. Bye!
-
-
And yet you didn't list a single one. I have yet to see an expert in analysis and design of data who thinks the evidence for masks is of any quality, let alone "excellent papers". It's just not reality.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.