We've asked that the Bangladesh mask study either be corrected or withdrawn
stevekirsch.substack.com
We've asked that the Bangladesh mask study either be corrected or withdrawn
The study showed nothing. If there was any protection at all, it was too small to measure in the study that was done. The authors need to do the right thing and correct or retract the study ASAP.
Just for the public record, I sent this email today to Yale economics professor Jason Abaluck, the corresponding author of the Bangladesh mask study paper.
I will let you know if he responds. That would be the ethical thing to do.
The Bangladesh study abstract did indeed claim some benefit, but the 95% CI of .82-1.00 admits that there is no evidence that the actual effect of masks is not zero. When the CI includes 1.0, that is the definition of "statistically insignificant". The CDC report of the Bangladesh study similarly brags up the claimed benefit up high in the CDC article, but way down at the bottom admits the CI. You don't need any other authority than the Bangladesh study itself to refute its glowing report. See my analysis at http://savetheworld.saltshaker.us/wiki/Application_for_Secular/Religious_Exemption_from_Mask/Vaccine_Mandate_-_Section_Two,_The_Evidence
This is my take on the results of the Bangladesh study - their claim that it proves masks prevent 9-11% of Covid infections is suspect - Correlation is not Causation.
https://firstfactcheck.substack.com/p/claim-masks-work-to-prevent-spread