You are reading a single comment by @hurricane_run and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
Well, assuming it's all as study shows: 0.3% is 1/6th of 1.8% so about a 13% reduction. Not bad maybe? It in that sense depends on how you look at it.
Now if they would test this with people wearing masks inside and eating 2 meters apart, with most infections spread inside in households, that 16% would be quite awesome.
-
It certainly dampens the case for the use of masks to prevent catching the virus, but that is not really their primary intended purpose (from the CDC site: 'Masks are primarily intended to reduce the emission of virus-laden droplets '). I agree with you that hopefully there are more tests in the pipeline.
JWestland
tb
@hurricane_run
You're quite right. However there seems to be a lack of testing regarding the efficacy of masks and the above suggests that they make no meaningful difference in the conditions stated. Hopefully there are more proper test results in the pipeline for a general mask wearing situation.
In my opinion the results do cast doubt on the wearing of masks as a COVID control.