This one is against rationalists because when Scott wrote his review that masks could be effective many of us trusted it.
I don't blame Scott for failing this one because doing review of hundreds of studies is hard and one person can hardly do it. But this clearly shows that rationalist way of thinking has no special formula, they can be easily mistaken and fall by accepting general consensus just like any other person.
I was impressed when Scott did his review about masks. I trusted it because there was no other clear evidence available. Cochrane hadn't done its review yet and NICE guidelines were silent on the issue. We vaguely knew from previous studies that masks are not effective, The WHO had said so. Suddenly everyone flipped and it was not because the evidence had changed. We simply wanted to believe that masks work and we mocked those who said “no evidence that masks help”.
Even with the belief that masks work, I never wanted mask mandates. I preferred recommendations only, so that no one was penalized or prohibited entry, travel etc if one doesn't want to wear mask. Scott unwillingly had been a catalyst for governments to introduce mask mandates and all this heavy handed approach has been for nothing.
Now we are back to square one, the evidence about masks is weak and it does not support their use even in hospital settings. We can all reflect now what happened in between during these 2 or 3 years. When I realized that Scott's review is clearly insufficient as evidence, I asked some doctors if they have any better evidence that masks work. Instead of getting answer I was told not to be silly, parachutes don't need RCTs and accused me of being covid denier for nor reason. Many so-called experts were making the same mistake as Scott by looking at the issue too emotionally. It is time to get back to reality and admit that it was a mistake and we should have judged the issue with more rational mind.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I thought the topic was "do masks work?" not "do mask mandates work?". These are very different questions, and can be broken down further with questions like "do N95 masks worn by untrained people work?" and "do fit-tested N95 masks work?", without even delving into the details of how we want to define "work", presumably some measure of reducing the incidence of COVID-19 in the mask wearers, although looking at reducing the incidence of COVID-19 in people around the mask wearers is also an interesting question.
The summary of the study that I referenced suggests the study answered the question of "does having masks vaguely nearby that you wear inconsistently reduce the incidence of COVID-19 in mask wearers?" and got the utterly unsurprising answer of "no". Maybe that's a realistic view of what behavior under mask mandates looks like, but that information doesn't really give us any hints on the answers to questions like "does training our medical personnel and requiring them to wear fit-tested N95s at all times reduce the transmission of COVID-19 in our medical facility?" or "does an individual choosing to wear an N95 while on transit / in airports reduce the chance they'll get COVID-19?".
More options
Context Copy link