Re Meta-analysis and the distinction between no evidence of benefit vs. evidence of no benefit, see:
Smith & Pell. Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2003; 327 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7429.1459
Re Meta-analysis and the distinction between no evidence of benefit vs. evidence of no benefit, see:
Smith & Pell. Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2003; 327 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7429.1459
The parachute analogy honestly is lazy, and the fact that we have done RCTs before and after Covid 19, still unable to find efficacy, demonstrates how silly this analogy is by comparing it something which has micropores thousands of times larger than the micropore in an n95 mask.
Re Meta-analysis and the distinction between no evidence of benefit vs. evidence of no benefit, see:
Smith & Pell. Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2003; 327 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7429.1459
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/#:~:text=The%20parachute%20is%20used%20in,of%20jumping%20from%20an%20aircraft.
The parachute analogy honestly is lazy, and the fact that we have done RCTs before and after Covid 19, still unable to find efficacy, demonstrates how silly this analogy is by comparing it something which has micropores thousands of times larger than the micropore in an n95 mask.
https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/31/its-unfair-use-parachute-analogy
This is effing brilliant.