Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 19 days ago)
35,670 posts, read 18,045,481 times
Reputation: 50725
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
That’s a totally different study then this one.
Oh right, I realize that. I was talking to the person who posted that study, believing it said that masks don't work in prevention of transmission of COVID.
I'm afraid the mask cultists will accept nothing less than 100% mask compliance at all times in all places, at least until after the Presidential election.
I clicked back in, and I had 3 choices to "choose" and none of the sounded safe to me. Sounds all garbled, who knows WHAT is coming through when you open that link. It's not the typical "this website uses cookies, you must enable cookies", or "the website would like to use your location to further aid you".
I'm into studies, and research, and understand what "double blind" and "placebo" mean in responsible research, and I can't see how you could possibly have those conditions in a study where participants are either wearing a face mask or not. Because they would know.
Did you read through the methodology? Can you describe how it's done?
The final concern - and it's a big one - is that the researchers are keeping these findings so secret and are angry that responsible medical journals won't publish them. Anyone else, doing ground breaking research they believe is true, would say "we've conclusively found that masks don't (or do, whatever) stop the spread of COVID, and here are our findings although we are having a hard time getting this information accepted for publication". Really, this is SO off, the secretiveness and the weird website blocker - I just don't trust it.
But I would be happy to read through the methodology if someone could either copy and paste it, or could describe it on the forum.
We can’t read through the methodology until it’s published but based on what I can find, 3000 wore the mask anytime they left the house and had to do so for at least three hours a day. The other 3000 did not wear masks but followed the health authority recommendations, they also had to leave the house at least three hours a day. It sounds like a lot of the participants worked in grocery stores.
I’m not familiar with how these scientific studies are done. In language understandable to a layperson like me, can you explain how a study can be “blind” if the study subjects know whether they are wearing a mask or not? The intervention under investigation is a mask, and it would seem that is pretty hard to “blind”.
I’m not familiar with how these scientific studies are done. In language understandable to a layperson like me, can you explain how a study can be “blind” if the study subjects know whether they are wearing a mask or not? The intervention under investigation is a mask, and it would seem that is pretty hard to “blind”.
Sorry, my mistake. It’s a randomized controlled trial.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
