• Mashup Score: 337

    Of sixteen quantitative meta‐​analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.

    Tweet Tweets with this article
    • CDC director has confused politics with evidence The evidence pre-pandemic was indisputable - it was weak, and not recommended; Given CDC ran no good studies, it remains weak Another fail for @CDCgov Here is a review of the evidence https://t.co/7Dy5LBC0BS https://t.co/gL5239R4nr

  • Mashup Score: 175

    Of sixteen quantitative meta‐​analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.

    Tweet Tweets with this article
    • No, they don't. The gold standard in medicine for transmission is cluster randomization. The reason we didn't recommend it prepandemic was the evidence is weak. It's still just as weak, but now is a religion too. Here's the data 👇👇 https://t.co/7Dy5LBjRnK https://t.co/lD3eisKu9k

  • Mashup Score: 176

    Of sixteen quantitative meta‐​analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.

    Tweet Tweets with this article
    • The reason we didn't recommend masks for respiratory viruses prior to COVID is The totality of randomized control trial data was negative👇 Pre-VID, Public health used evidence to guide actions. It might have been ok to act w/o data in 3/20 Not ok now https://t.co/7Dy5LBC0BS https://t.co/mHIz23Vh2o

  • Mashup Score: 52

    Of sixteen quantitative meta‐​analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.

    Tweet Tweets with this article
    • Help me understand 👇. These are your tweets since Oct 1; Why do you keep pushing masking on others; when you have lost your own mask? PS: a systematic review of the data is negative https://t.co/7Dy5LBjRnK https://t.co/fTVn6WcDXG https://t.co/wKVXlUo0Qr

  • Mashup Score: 527

    Of sixteen quantitative meta‐​analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.

    Tweet Tweets with this article
    • We reviewed 200+ refs in our review of the efficacy of community mask mandates/ advice. The evidence was horribly weak. Imagine if public health has just been honest Ran a few cluster RCTs Admitted uncertainty Now we turned masking into a religion 👇 https://t.co/7Dy5LBC0BS https://t.co/XLAfgE8AER

  • Mashup Score: 1

    Cato CEF’s Private Schooling Status Tracker shows the private school landscape continues to improve after an initial hard hit from COVID-19.

    Tweet Tweets with this article
    • RT @CatoInstitute: One size doesn’t fit all when it comes to education. https://t.co/LP7Gfr6oDr #CatoCEF https://t.co/2JQz4rJsno