OK, thanks for the link. I’m not seeing the worst methodology ever (at least the pre-print), probably on par with most community-based studies, even if Nature hailed it as a gold standard clinical trial, but when the authors tried to argue that Cochrane review was flawed because the intervention groups weren’t even wearing masks more than controls clearly they didn’t even believe the hype.
I just grabbed the first negative report Google would let slip through.
It really is bad—and yes, community studies are dicey to start with. Here’s another take: