Alternatively those who choose to live their life in fear could have hidden themselves away and let everyone else get on with it.

I cannot find any link to a Cochrane report posted here, other than those I have provided. Not recently anyway. I have though managed to find it myself. The cherry picked extracts actually do nothing to counter the general consensus that masks help to reduce infection.

However, more importantly, during my searching I also came across this statement from the Cochrane editor which refers to this report:-

“Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.

It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive. Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask-wearing itself reduces people's risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses.

The review authors are clear on the limitations in the abstract: 'The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions.' Adherence in this context refers to the number of people who actually wore the provided masks when encouraged to do so as part of the intervention. For example, in the most heavily-weighted trial of interventions to promote community mask wearing, 42.3% of people in the intervention arm wore masks compared to 13.3% of those in the control arm.

The original Plain Language Summary for this review stated that 'We are uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses based on the studies we assessed.' This wording was open to misinterpretation, for which we apologize. While scientific evidence is never immune to misinterpretation, we take responsibility for not making the wording clearer from the outset. We are engaging with the review authors with the aim of updating the Plain Language Summary and abstract to make clear that the review looked at whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses.”

So it’s been misinterpreted and Cochrane have apologised. Which raises the question why it’s been posted here and how it was found. My guess being that some anti-mask, anti-virus believer has trawled through the web looking for anything that could be spun to seem to support their position. It’s then been circulated and repeated by those with similar prejudices.

So why wasn’t the editor’s apology and explanation also provided and the misleading quotes allowed to remain?

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

No blame attached to those who take these decisions as usual. We didn't choose the right people.

They weren’t “in fear” because they knew preventative measures were being taken.

If only a minority were prepared to take steps to protect themselves and the majority weren’t then that argument might make some sense. The minority though were those refusing to cooperate so it was them who had to accept the consequences.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Because this unvaccinated 6% of the population were the only ones who could catch or pass it on obviously.

Finding no evidence because of insufficient data to reach a conclusion is not the same as saying that the evidence doesn’t exist. It just says that in this particular study there wasn’t enough to make pronouncements. That’s what “inconclusive” means!

Fact: no evidence was found that masks didn’t make any significant difference.

To go on trying to defend misleading claims when the editor of the site which was used and referenced has distanced themselves from them and apologised to their users for the misleading way they were written, is risible.

These claims are not found in Cochrane. They have denied them. Nor are they found elsewhere. On the contrary there is a lot of evidence which suggests that masks can, and do, make a difference. How much depends on the type of mask and the circumstances, but they all have an effect. Any positive effect being better than none.

That people still caught the virus is completely beside the point and a deflection. What has been established, as a settled fact, is that masks reduce the viral load being emitted and the distance it travels before it disperses or falls to the ground. Not that it’s eliminated. Reducing the viral load reduces the scale and intensity of infections.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.