GORG: ten rozdíl mezi námi je, že ty cituješ článek a já si čtu studii, z které to vychází. rozhodně tam tak úderný závěry nejsou a sníženou funkci ochrany dýchacích cest ovlivňuje spousta dalších věcí (authors conclusion) a ohledně účinnosti vakcinace se nezmiňujou vůbec. naletěls na clickbait a narazil sis nos, tím bych to uzavřel.
nemáš ani dost soudnosti, aby ses nevymlouval na to, že se ti ochránci osobních svobod neváhali s agresí, nulová sebereflexe, nulový zájem o primární zdroje informací. a je naprosto vedlejší, jestli zkoušíš uvažovat o klimatu, covidu nebo čemkoliv dalším. tvůj způsob uvažování a způsob sběru informací je naprosto špatně.
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/fullThe evidence summarised in this review on the use of masks is largely based on studies conducted during traditional peak respiratory virus infection seasons up until 2016. Two relevant randomised trials conducted during the COVID‐19 pandemic have been published, but their addition had minimal impact on the overall pooled estimate of effect. The observed lack of effect of mask wearing in interrupting the spread of influenza‐like illness (ILI) or influenza/COVID‐19 in our review has many potential reasons, including: poor study design; insufficiently powered studies arising from low viral circulation in some studies; lower adherence with mask wearing, especially amongst children; quality of the masks used; self‐contamination of the mask by hands; lack of protection from eye exposure from respiratory droplets (allowing a route of entry of respiratory viruses into the nose via the lacrimal duct); saturation of masks with saliva from extended use (promoting virus survival in proteinaceous material); and possible risk compensation behaviour leading to an exaggerated sense of security (Ammann 2022; Brosseau 2020; Byambasuren 2021; Canini 2010; Cassell 2006; Coroiu 2021; MacIntyre 2015; Rengasamy 2010; Zamora 2006).