[Goose]

I must admit I am somewhat disappointed that the CDC does not cite clear reasons for changes it makes in policy. If you read the release, there are lots of "might" and "may" words in there. This is fine, but it is a lot better to present the evidence upon which the change is based. If you don't do that, the question becomes "Why is this advice any better than the previous advice?".

Goose, interesting point. I agree with you. But I'm a bit torn, because with science in general, and particularly with regards to Covid-19, "might" and "may" are probably more accurate than being certain. As I get older, the more I see uncertainty as a sign of intelligence. So here I am full of OTOH thoughts.

I totally agree that uncertainty may be the most accurate description of the situation. Sometimes, that is just reality. Unfortunately, it isn't considered politically correct to admit what yo don't know. If the CDC would just say "Our opinion has changed because after evaluating the situation we believe it probable that mask operate somewhat bilaterally. We do not have conclusive proof of this, but there is a reasonable argument that it is so." I think that represents reality, and people can understand the position. I think that works much better than just changing the position and not saying anything about why.

[Goose]

I must admit I am somewhat disappointed that the CDC does not cite clear reasons for changes it makes in policy. If you read the release, there are lots of "might" and "may" words in there. This is fine, but it is a lot better to present the evidence upon which the change is based. If you don't do that, the question becomes "Why is this advice any better than the previous advice?".

Goose, interesting point. I agree with you. But I'm a bit torn, because with science in general, and particularly with regards to Covid-19, "might" and "may" are probably more accurate than being certain. As I get older, the more I see uncertainty as a sign of intelligence. So here I am full of OTOH thoughts.

I totally agree that uncertainty may be the most accurate description of the situation. Sometimes, that is just reality. Unfortunately, it isn't considered politically correct to admit what yo don't know. If the CDC would just say "Our opinion has changed because after evaluating the situation we believe it probable that mask operate somewhat bilaterally. We do not have conclusive proof of this, but there is a reasonable argument that it is so." I think that represents reality, and people can understand the position. I think that works much better than just changing the position and not saying anything about why.