Subject: Re: Murthy vs Missouri , for the legal scholars
Dope1: Boom. That's my foot going up the arse of the drive-by's posts.

So I'll ask again. Where's the apology for being really, really wrong on just about everything wrt Covid?

Umm, a Bret Stephens op-ed is your mic drop moment?

Sheesh.

Let's go to the study that Stephens claims proves masks were ineffective where you'll find these "Author's Conclusions:"


The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children.

There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect.

Huh.

A paper in the American Journal of Public Health analyzed the Cochrane paper and wrote a very detailed response (link below) explaining its deficiencies, noting:

The science of masking and its impact on SARS-CoV-2 transmission is complicated. Observational studies present valuable data that warrant consideration in informing policy with a full understanding of the utility of mask use in a variety of settings. The Cochrane review did not include a large body of evidence, and that resulted in a biased conclusion. If all types of studies are considered, it is clear that well-fitting, properly used masks do have a measurable and significant effect on reducing transmission when properly worn by the vast majority of the population during times of high community transmission. Although the data in the two new studies included in the Cochrane update on masks are accurate, modeling studies correctly predict the small effect sizes that those studies observed; furthermore, the models predict that the effect size would be much larger with better masks more widely and correctly used. Taken together, these and other studies strongly indicate that masking is an effective intervention to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (source control) and should be considered to protect those most vulnerable from severe COVID-19 illness (wearer protection) as a general nonpharmaceutical intervention during times of high transmission.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

https://www.cochrane.org/CD006...