other things I noticed in the study:
https://www.poverty-action.org/site..._RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf
1. We cross-randomized mask promotion strategies at the village and household level, including
cloth vs. surgical masks.
--
In focus groups conducted prior to the study, participants said they preferred cloth over surgical
masks
because they perceived surgical masks to be single-use only and cloth masks to be more
durable. Focus group participants also provided feedback on different cloth masks designs and
sizes. Both types of masks were manufactured in Bangladesh. The cloth mask had an exterior layer
of 100% non-woven polypropylene (70 grams/square meter [gsm]), two interior layers of 60%
cotton / 40% polyester interlocking knit (190 gsm), an elastic loop that goes around the head above
and below the ears, and a nose bridge. The surgical mask had three layers of 100% non-woven
polypropylene (the exterior and interiors were spunbond and the middle layer was meltblown),
elastic ear loops, and a nose bridge. The
filtration efficiency was 37% (standard deviation [SD] =
6%) for the cloth masks,
and 95% (SD = 1%) for the surgical masks (manuscript forthcoming).3
2. Mask-wearing and physical distancing were assessed through direct observation
at least weekly.
... if I'm reading this right they hired someone to count mask wearers once a week... wow, that seems kinda lame
3.
Surveillance staff observed a single individual
and recorded that person as practicing physical distancing if s/he was at least one arm’s length away
from all other people. This is consistent with the WHO guideline that defines physical distancing
as one meter of separation.6 Surveillance was conducted using a standard protocol that instructed
staff to spend one hour at each of the following high-traffic locations in the village: market, restaurant entrances, main road, tea stalls, and mosque, changing the location and timing to record the
mask-wearing and physical distancing practices of as many individuals as possible.
While SARSCoV-2 transmission is more likely in indoor locations with limited ventilation than outside, rural
Bangladeshi villages have few non-residential spaces where people gather, so
observations were
conducted outside except at the mosque, where surveillance was conducted inside.
... classic junk science
... also, see the tweet below it looks like folks were talking their masks off when they entered the mosque, but then they told them to put them on and 50% of people did.
3. There was no physical distancing practiced in any mosque,
in either treatment or control villages, probably as a result of
the strong religious norm of standing shoulder-to-shoulder when praying.
... classic junk science
4. Surveillance staff noted whether adults were wearing any
mask or face covering, whether the mask was one distributed by our project (and if so, the color), and
whether the mask was worn over both the mouth and nose.
5. They recorded the mask-wearing behavior of all of the adults they
were able to observe during surveillance periods; observations were
not limited to adults from
enrolled households.
... I get that this kind of study is really hard to do, but isn't this a ridiculous lack of control
6. We defined proper mask-wearing as wearing either a project mask
or an
alternative face-covering over the mouth and nose.
... so not only do you have two different kind of masks in your study... but your "surveillance"/counting of masks use includes people who are using " face covering." I mean, does this include muslim women who are wrapped those scarves around their face?
7. ok I'm kind of losing patience with this but my biggest takeaways are
-- we now know that covid is largely spread indoors... within households. this study seems to completely ignore this fact
-- we know social distancing is way more important than mask wearing... but this study seems to be some kind of weird mash of social distancing and mask-wearing. yeah, we told them to social distance, but they really didn't do that much so we doubledDown on the face covering thing.
Boy, this sure looks like junk science to me.
I hope others weigh in