What’s Happening to the ‘Right to Try’?
This Bill Aims to Protect Children From Pornography – but There Might...
Why CNN Says Dems Are Garbage
Adieu and Good Riddance to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Kevin Brock. The Best of America's FBI
The Left and Losers
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 279: Moses in the New Testament – Book...
Our Federal Government Remains Bloated Beyond Belief
Desperate to Cling to Power, Mullah's Executioners Target Political Prisoners
Senate Officially Confirms Jeanine Pirro As U.S. Attorney for DC
Trump Says Market Fallout Is Only Reason He Hasn’t Fired Fed Chair Powell
How a USDA Employee and 5 Others Stole Millions From the Poor
Double Standard Exposed: MAGA Gear Banned at Public Events While Pride, Trans Flags...
Hochul Backs Socialist Zohran Mamdani on Affordability
Colorado Cops Punished for Helping ICE, As Sanctuary State Law Takes Priority Over...
Tipsheet

New Lancet Study Destroys the CDC's Justification for School Mask Mandates

AP Photo/Denis Poroy

The Lancet, a world-renown medical journal, is out with a new study debunking a highly-cited CDC study that was used to support mask mandates in schools.

Specifically, the study not only replicates the CDC study, which found a “negative association” between masks and pediatric cases of Covid-19, it also extends the study to include more districts over a longer period of time. In the end, the new study had nearly “six times as much data as the original study.”

Advertisement

“Replicating the CDC study shows similar results; however, incorporating a larger sample and longer period showed no significant relationship between mask mandates and case rates,” the study finds. “These results persisted when using regression methods to control for differences across districts. Interpretation: School districts that choose to mandate masks are likely to be systematically different from those that do not in multiple, often unobserved, ways. We failed to establish a relationship between school masking and pediatric cases using the same methods but a larger, more nationally diverse population over a longer interval. Our study demonstrates that observational studies of interventions with small to moderate effect sizes are prone to bias caused by selection and omitted variables. Randomized studies can more reliably inform public health policy.”

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement