I am completely aware of that study. That study is exactly what I had in mind when I wrote my comment. The effect sizes were barely significant. Not all groups managed any effect of significance. There are biases, confounding factors and limitations of that study. Those results are not the slam dunk you think they are. I implore you to read the study carefully.

Barely significant? What is that supposed to mean?

The evidence is clear - mask wearing reduces infections. You seem to be arguing something else.

According to the study itself, the evidence is _not_ clear:

> Although the point estimates for cloth masks suggests that they reduce risk, the confidence limits include both an effect size similar to surgical masks and no effect at all

You're cherry-picking the results for cloth masks. The study found surgical masks do better. And I assume by now everyone knows N95 are superior.

And anyway, it's unlikely the true effect would land squarely on zero.

I'm not cherry picking. This whole thread is related to mask mandates. No one is mandating N95 masks. All the discussion around masks in this context is about cloth masks.

Even if it was related to masks in general, very few people are wearing N95 masks for protection. Cloth masks are far more relevant.

I have no idea where you’re coming from. The word cloth does not appear in the Reason article. You’re just making vague assertions.

Masks work, it’s settled. I don’t need to point out the logical fallacy in “some masks aren’t as good, therefore mask mandates don’t work.”

You're making a mistake by drawing conclusions that masks aren't effective. Pointing to one study which has non-significant data means you shouldn't draw any conclusion at all from it.

I'm not drawing conclusions from that study, I'm pointing out that the study which the OP used to say "the science is pretty clear" and "the evidence is clear" does not reach the same conclusion as OP.

Your comment should really be directed at the OP, not me.

You took ONE study and your claim is that the science is not clear on masks. You used that study as evidence for your conclusion. That is not how science works. One study not having enough data to support the hypothesis doesn't mean that the hypothesis is wrong or that ALL studies are unclear.