WOOHOO SB 739 has passed the house- it is on its way to the Governor-

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Looks like I have the Va legislature, Joseph Allen of Harvard, the WHO and most of Europe on my side though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

This is more an accusation levied against the unvaccinated. That's the only way to effectively protect those more vulnerable, right? Herd immunity, like what we have (for now, in most places) for measles, mumps, etc. If we can't move the needle much on vaccination numbers, then is the only option for protecting the vulnerable masking forever? As we have seen, that just isn't tenable. Would those on the side of "everyone needs to sacrifice indefinitely to protect the small % of the population with immunity concerns" be assuaged with the development of better therapeutics? That way even if Larlo gets COVID from unmasked Pierpont at school, Larlo's immune compromised grandma can quickly treat the infection and reduce the likelihood of a bad outcome. Or if that isn't enough, what is it you want from society???

There's a select few - but according to the UK it's very few - who are still vulnerable even after vaccination. Those people need access to pavloxovid and evushield to prevent infection and/or treat it quickly if it does happen. Personally I would be very happy if here in Virginia our Governor pushed hard on getting easy access to preventatives and treatments for the vulnerable as well as maybe instructing VDOE to require schools to improve ventilation with ESSER III money (if that's possible under the way that money is structured). I know FCPS did a lot toward improving ventilation, but I know a lot of that money is also getting wasted. Nationally we also need 1) a campaign to talk about just who actually is clinically vulnerable (a smaller subset than the people who are terrified) and 2) treatments and preventatives for the small number of kids who are clinically vulnerable (existing ones are only for 12+) if possible.

But I don't think it makes sense to wait to unmask the vast majority of kids for those things to happen. Start them now, yes, but also unmask the kids.

And I think it's idiotic to simultaneously look down on the unvaccinated by choice vulnerable while making kids live abnormal lives to protect them. Anyone unvaccinated by choice gets to live their lives within that risk tolerance. Around here enough people are vaccinated that the hospitals won't get overrun, so whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

Options that aren't masks for mitigation:

1) easy access to preventatives and treatment
2) improved ventilation

Honestly, if you're scared now send a Corsi-Rosenthal box to class with your kid after the emergency order goes into law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember how a year ago starting kids in hybrid was going to be terrible… and nothing happened. Then there were going to be dead teachers and kids because we were going back 5 days/week in the fall with the delta variant… and nothing happened. After New Years we were all once again going to die because of omicron… and nothing happened. I’m expecting the same when the masks come off.

This area is full of Chicken Littles trying to run everyone else’s lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

[Anonymous]

The Governor has added the emergency clause (read it: https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?221+cab+SC20215SB0739+SBGOV).

It will be voted on by the senate today in a supplemental session, where it has a chance at the narrowest margin of passage, today. If it passes the senate it will be in effect March 1.

Senate supplemental session calendar: https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?221+cal+SC20215

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ha- I'm the OP of this thread. I'm no operative if any sort. Just a frustrated FCC mom- who social distanced, masked and vaxxed with the best of them. I closely closely follow science, and numbers etc and have the ability to change my mind. What I've seen over the last 7 months has convinced me that 'science' has very little to do with this- this is about proving our liberalism. When FCCPS refused to follow the CDC, and insisted on quarantining elementary school children for 14 days with no possibility of testing out- keeping needy children out of school- I lost faith in them. FCC has an incredibly high vaccination rate. The community obsessively masks. We have had 4 people total hospitalized for COVID in the last 90 days. Our case count has been astronomical for a long time. So where do I come down- let it go. The risk to a vaccinated person is so so minor. Why are we doing this to our kids? For the first 1.5 years of the pandemic I was willing to employ any mitigation measure that might make a difference. At this point, given the vaccines, any mitigation measure should be run through a solid cost benefit analysis. There is very little evidence that a universal mask mandate makes ANY difference for case transmission- and case transmission shouldn't really be our benchmark in any event. I'm done. My kids need normalcy and they need it now.

+1000.

Same. I'm in Arlington and am just baffled at how we're treating kids right now. Both sides often sound completely bonkers and self-righteous, so it feels impossible to move forward.

We are going to suffer a Republican congress and Trump 2.0 if we keep ignoring all of the frustrated, alienated, and overworked parents.

OP I'm with you on a lot of what you say but you completely loose me (and a lot of other people) when you forget the vaccine is NOT yet available for kids under 5. Many kids and teachers in schools have siblings and children under 5. Pre-K classes in Arlington are comprised of 4 year olds. Also, I really don't know what people are looking at that leads them to believe masks don't work. Maybe you're wearing loose bandanas or something cute off of Etsy, but there are a lot of solid mask choices that do prevent transmission. Masks are a big part (maybe the main reason) omicron has NOT spread like wild fire in early ES classrooms where kids sit inches from eachother, face to face, sharing materials all day. I mean, my kids haven't had a single cold ALL YEAR, which has NEVER happened before. Masks are stopping the spread of disease here.

PP I agree people are frustrated, alienated (especially families with children under 5 who have chronic health issues), and overworked, and while that may explain why some vote for a candidate who tells them what they want to hear even if that isn't based in reality, it is a pathetic excuse. Reality is tough right now. It has been for the past 2 years. There are a lot of groups in this country who faced ugly realities even before COVID.

So you can keep your kids in a mask if you want. We are fine with that. Please keep in mind that not a single person under the age of 40 has died of Covid in Arlington during the entirety of the pandemic. This virus simply does not justify the extreme measures taken but you should feel free to mask you kids. Just don't ask us to. Our cost-benefit analysis came out differently than yours.

All I hear from you is you got your vaccine so who cares about the under 5 kids with chronic health conditions.

Kids under 5 with chronic health conditions have to be a tiny tiny percentage of the population, and presumably not all conditions are risk factors for COVID. It makes more sense for those kids to wear KN95s or similar if they are truly at risk.

Masks are even more important to mitigate the possibility that the person wearing the mask will spread the virus which is why everyone should still wear them and your so called freedom to have your child mask free impinges on my freedom to have my child in a setting which sufficiently safe for school.

And your kid’s “freedom” is impinging on the freedom of my child who has social delays, expressive language/articulation problems, and sensory issues who has been struggling with masking for 2 years now and lost needed in-person services during school closures. You can protect your child by having them wear a KN94/95, which seems totally reasonable in light of the sacrifices kids like mine have already made.

[Anonymous]

The action deadline on the emergency clause is February 21, so it's definitely getting voted on before then (https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?221+sum+SB739)

[Anonymous]

Interestingly the Governor wants to add a paragraph to SB 739 that allows a Governor to still close schools or mandate masks if there's a state of emergency. Does that not provide the flexibility that people are screaming about here if there's an absolutely horrendous variant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interestingly the Governor wants to add a paragraph to SB 739 that allows a Governor to still close schools or mandate masks if there's a state of emergency. Does that not provide the flexibility that people are screaming about here if there's an absolutely horrendous variant?

I suspect he did that to protect against legal challenges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interestingly the Governor wants to add a paragraph to SB 739 that allows a Governor to still close schools or mandate masks if there's a state of emergency. Does that not provide the flexibility that people are screaming about here if there's an absolutely horrendous variant?

I support that addition fwiw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interestingly the Governor wants to add a paragraph to SB 739 that allows a Governor to still close schools or mandate masks if there's a state of emergency. Does that not provide the flexibility that people are screaming about here if there's an absolutely horrendous variant?

I support that addition fwiw.

I can't tell if I support it. If VA were governed by Hochul or Newsome we would literally still be under a state of emergency and they'd happily mask kids in schools while letting the rest of life go on, just like they are in NY or CA. I think I'd be more comfortable with it if the legislature had to renew the state of emergency regularly or authorize a longer state of emergency, but with a part-time legislature that's a pain.