This week’s main post considered a study comparing the efficacy if different materials used to make masks in the era of COVID. With a few quick mini posts, I want to evaluate this site from the University of Cambridge. The site appears intended to provide “research” on how to protect oneself from viral infections like COVID. Each mini-post will have a question and opportunity to participate in the movement.
Today’s question: Is the site offering one sided information?
Past discernment series and my blog series on masks in general (Unmasking the Truth) includes a variety of “methods” to evaluate information and its sources. (see here)
Today, or in coming weeks as they add more information to the site, consider if they are offering both sides of the debate in regards to masks. Right now, they appear to assume that masks are necessary and they are just helping to optimize their use. If this bias turns out to be true, we can read any future information from them with that filter in mind.
Then we can consider if this site will end up listed in the propaganda list or actually be a helpful resource in the future. Right now, the site has some empty links so it is hard to know how it will turn out.
University of Cambridge Site
Their recent article on masks:
Eugenia O’Kelly, Sophia Pirog, James Ward, P John Clarkson. Ability of fabric face mask materials to filter ultrafine particles at coughing velocity. BMJ Open, 2020; 10 (9): e039424 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039424