SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : Coronavirus / COVID-19 Pandemic
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
Stock Puppy
To: Graystone who wrote (2898)5/18/2020 10:44:50 AM
From: TimF1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) of 22868
 
Yes it is a contested issue, within science not just with people ignorant of it. The overall weight of evidence suggests that they are effective, but there have been a couple of studies suggesting they were ineffective and the CDC and WHO were saying that non-filer masks were ineffective relatively recently. That last bit was probably to reduce demand for something they were trying to save for higher priority uses but if so a blatant lie like that gives less reason to rely on their changed official opinions now.

Again I'm not disagreeing with you about being quite useful for protection of others, and even a bit useful to protect the wearer. I think the evidence suggests they do that. But it isn't an idea that should be considered unquestionable dogma. Partially because science doesn't work that way in the first place (or at least it shouldn't and when it does its a problem), and partially because the science is less absolutely certain than you seem to think.
Science doesn't work by examining data and theories and it never has.Science works by proposing hypotheses as truths and then testing them to see if they can be disproven.
What do you think proposing hypotheses involves? - examining theories and data and ideas is a big part of it. The analyzing of test results also involves examining data and theories. Yes experiments (in fields and questions where you can do them) are key, but aren't all of science. And if the ideas can't even be expressed openly or aren't considered when they are you don't get the new potentially useful hypotheses. Even after experiments things often aren't really finally settled in science, they are always properly open to reconsideration and retesting, and sometimes that testing doesn't confirm even answers that were considered correct for years (see the replication crisis). And with Covid-19 being a new virus you have even more uncertainty.

And no one here is doing any experiments (and the experiments by others who actually are doing them are relatively limited with a new virus and somewhat conflicted). This isn't a scientific journal allowing only peer reviewed science through. Its a discussion area. Examinging theories and data and ideas should be what this is about. Not grabbing some idea calling is SCIENCE and treating it as dogma.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News