Put the full quote in for you, don't want people accusing you of cherry picking...
We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility However, as with hand hygiene, face masks might be able to reduce the transmission of other infections and therefore have value in an influenza pandemic when healthcare resources are stretched.
What are the other infections? Might? Is might a good scientific position to base something on? Might what? What's the criteria that it "might" reduce those transmissions? Size of the particle? Is coronavirus large enough for that to be the case?
Goodness, I didn't write the article. I did read it though. All of it.
I edited the comment before noticing you replied:
Might? Is might a good scientific position to base something on? Might what? What's the criteria that it "might" reduce those transmissions? Size of the particle? Is coronavirus large enough for that to be the case?
Goodness you didn't right it, ok, I didn't suspect you did. They say "might", and that seem to carry a lot of weight in your response.
It wasn't the word might that carried weight with me, it was the fact you omitted that part in your quote. I find for the sake of transparency, if you are going to take a quote from an article that supports your narrative then by not quoting the part which undermines that point, no matter how slightly, is telling in itself.
Yeah, it "might" do something. Why would they say that, without backing it up with any explanation? Is that an agenda of their own?
What about their own conclusion:
Does that matter? Why not talk about that conclusion? "Looking at other studies, the conclusion is there is no significant reduction with masks, but hey, ya never know, it 'might' actually do something anyways..." LOL. Yeah, that holds a lot of weight ;)
:0)