Un vēl par šo Lancet rakstu, vai tu vispār to izlasīji līdz galam? Jeb tikai atradi vienu teikumu “masks work” un izrāvi to no konteksta un juties lepns, ka esi pierādījis savu ideju? Tas ir, es gribu saprasts vai tu biji naivs, vai apzināti troļļoji?

Tātad tur bija teikums: Rader and colleagues show a relationship between transmission and reported mask usage but did not see a step change in transmission when statewide mask mandates were introduced.1

Tālāk:
First, there might be groups, such as young children, in which masks have deleterious effects, such as to childhood development,8 and guidelines should consider this evidence.

Second, care should be taken to avoid risk-compensation among people wearing a mask whereby people feel protected due to wearing a mask and so change their behaviour.

To nedaudz mīkstina, bet nepierāda kopējo efektu: The study of Rader and colleagues suggests that, in the US, risk-compensation does not cancel out the positive effect of face masks, but whether the US is representative of other countries is arguable.1

Es arī neatradu šajā vēstulē vārdu cloth vai jebkādu salīdzinājumu par dažādu masku kvalitāti.