DCPS: Masks Optional the rest of the year

[Anonymous]

Mendelson has been worse than useless on masking, but Bowser has really been much better than anyone else in the landscape on both school opening and masks. Not great, objectively speaking, but so much better than anyone else in city gov. The only person who has been brave enough to say a non-idiotic word on the subject is CM Silverman, so props to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mendelson has been worse than useless on masking, but Bowser has really been much better than anyone else in the landscape on both school opening and masks. Not great, objectively speaking, but so much better than anyone else in city gov. The only person who has been brave enough to say a non-idiotic word on the subject is CM Silverman, so props to her.

The same Silverman who lashed out at residents forced to go to other states to get the vaccine because they were stuck in line behind people who—we now know—don’t even want the vaccine and will never be convinced to get it?

[Anonymous]

Are you all still arguing about this? Sheesh!

[Anonymous]

The fact that folks on this thread are using news stories about children who have died from COVID is proof positive that almost no children are dying from COVID. When one does, its a news story. I recall ONE from Virginia last September, a year and a half into the pandemic.

At what point will militant maskers recognize that the people vulnerable to COVID can and should be responsible for their own safety? Get a vaccine, wear an N95. Punishing children indefinitely for the ignorance of others is no longer something I'm willing to support, especially when cases are so low, and so benign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For at least the vast majority of preschoolers, COVID is less dangerous than the flu. Masking them isn’t to protect them and anyone who still insists it is is lying. If COVID affected everyone like it affects 0-5 year olds we would never have implemented any measures at all. Kids have been masked to prevent spread to others the whole time. That’s a choice that was made. But to pretend that we can’t unmask now because of the 2-5s themselves? That’s lunacy and a lie. If you have an immunocompromised 2-5 and/or at risk family members living in your house? Put your kid in an N95. That is way more protective than pretend masks on all kids. My husband is an ER doctor and is more or less bathed in COVID all day and no COVID. N95 for the win.

So much lunacy and lying in one post, hard to know where to start. Masks even cotton ones assist in filtering out COVID and other particles, and assist in blocking transmission: https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mSphere.00637-20. Can't wait to see the receipts of your donations of N95 for kids who can't be vaccinated....still waiting, Mde. Hypocrite. Since you are so worried about the flu, I guess you also support mandatory flu vaccines and masking during flu season?

COVID is far more likely to result in pneumonia, hospitalization, and serious complications than the flu: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/patient-safety-outcomes/covid-19-in-kids-tied-to-more-complications-than-flu.html. I get that you think that your kids b/c of your privilege are shielded from dying of COVID. But many parents a) get that their kids could be the unlucky ones; or b) unlike you, actually care about other people's kids.

Cotton masks worn like PKers wear them are close to useless. Certainly one N95 >>>>> 2 cotton masks. That's not debatable. If individual kids need N95s because they can't be vaccinated, I'd be happy to spearhead a drive to get donations... but DC could absolutely pay for that for less money than all the COVID theater measures. And no, my point was that we don't require masks for the flu... and we shouldn't; though in terms of science w/r/t 2-5s themselves? Masks for flu makes more sense than masks for COVID. And I would actually support mandatory flu vaccines.

And the study you cite is 18 and unders... I am talking about the 2-5 population. In THAT population, the flu is more dangerous. The study your blurb is summarizing actually says that. So... perhaps read before responding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For at least the vast majority of preschoolers, COVID is less dangerous than the flu. Masking them isn’t to protect them and anyone who still insists it is is lying. If COVID affected everyone like it affects 0-5 year olds we would never have implemented any measures at all. Kids have been masked to prevent spread to others the whole time. That’s a choice that was made. But to pretend that we can’t unmask now because of the 2-5s themselves? That’s lunacy and a lie. If you have an immunocompromised 2-5 and/or at risk family members living in your house? Put your kid in an N95. That is way more protective than pretend masks on all kids. My husband is an ER doctor and is more or less bathed in COVID all day and no COVID. N95 for the win.

So much lunacy and lying in one post, hard to know where to start. Masks even cotton ones assist in filtering out COVID and other particles, and assist in blocking transmission: https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mSphere.00637-20. Can't wait to see the receipts of your donations of N95 for kids who can't be vaccinated....still waiting, Mde. Hypocrite. Since you are so worried about the flu, I guess you also support mandatory flu vaccines and masking during flu season?

COVID is far more likely to result in pneumonia, hospitalization, and serious complications than the flu: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/patient-safety-outcomes/covid-19-in-kids-tied-to-more-complications-than-flu.html. I get that you think that your kids b/c of your privilege are shielded from dying of COVID. But many parents a) get that their kids could be the unlucky ones; or b) unlike you, actually care about other people's kids.

Cotton masks worn like PKers wear them are close to useless. Certainly one N95 >>>>> 2 cotton masks. That's not debatable. If individual kids need N95s because they can't be vaccinated, I'd be happy to spearhead a drive to get donations... but DC could absolutely pay for that for less money than all the COVID theater measures. And no, my point was that we don't require masks for the flu... and we shouldn't; though in terms of science w/r/t 2-5s themselves? Masks for flu makes more sense than masks for COVID. And I would actually support mandatory flu vaccines.

And the study you cite is 18 and unders... I am talking about the 2-5 population. In THAT population, the flu is more dangerous. The study your blurb is summarizing actually says that. So... perhaps read before responding?

I’m with you on everything except flu vaccine. Not subjecting my kid to an annual vaccine that is sometimes only 30-40% effective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For at least the vast majority of preschoolers, COVID is less dangerous than the flu. Masking them isn’t to protect them and anyone who still insists it is is lying. If COVID affected everyone like it affects 0-5 year olds we would never have implemented any measures at all. Kids have been masked to prevent spread to others the whole time. That’s a choice that was made. But to pretend that we can’t unmask now because of the 2-5s themselves? That’s lunacy and a lie. If you have an immunocompromised 2-5 and/or at risk family members living in your house? Put your kid in an N95. That is way more protective than pretend masks on all kids. My husband is an ER doctor and is more or less bathed in COVID all day and no COVID. N95 for the win.

So much lunacy and lying in one post, hard to know where to start. Masks even cotton ones assist in filtering out COVID and other particles, and assist in blocking transmission: https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mSphere.00637-20. Can't wait to see the receipts of your donations of N95 for kids who can't be vaccinated....still waiting, Mde. Hypocrite. Since you are so worried about the flu, I guess you also support mandatory flu vaccines and masking during flu season?

COVID is far more likely to result in pneumonia, hospitalization, and serious complications than the flu: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/patient-safety-outcomes/covid-19-in-kids-tied-to-more-complications-than-flu.html. I get that you think that your kids b/c of your privilege are shielded from dying of COVID. But many parents a) get that their kids could be the unlucky ones; or b) unlike you, actually care about other people's kids.

Cotton masks worn like PKers wear them are close to useless. Certainly one N95 >>>>> 2 cotton masks. That's not debatable. If individual kids need N95s because they can't be vaccinated, I'd be happy to spearhead a drive to get donations... but DC could absolutely pay for that for less money than all the COVID theater measures. And no, my point was that we don't require masks for the flu... and we shouldn't; though in terms of science w/r/t 2-5s themselves? Masks for flu makes more sense than masks for COVID. And I would actually support mandatory flu vaccines.

And the study you cite is 18 and unders... I am talking about the 2-5 population. In THAT population, the flu is more dangerous. The study your blurb is summarizing actually says that. So... perhaps read before responding?

I’m with you on everything except flu vaccine. Not subjecting my kid to an annual vaccine that is sometimes only 30-40% effective.

Yup, anti-vaxxers 4ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

Yay! Now, let's get rid of the measles vaccine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

Yay! Now, let's get rid of the measles vaccine.

That one actually works for more than a month though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

Great. Don’t come on here b**tching when your kid is quarantined because 1 kid in their class tested positive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

Yay! Now, let's get rid of the measles vaccine.

That one actually works for more than a month though.

NP. Exactly. What an epically stupid analogy.

- Parent of two fully vaccinated kids, including for Covid

[Anonymous]

So excited for Wednesday!! No more masks!!!

Funny though it's just in time for spring allergies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

Great. Don’t come on here b**tching when your kid is quarantined because 1 kid in their class tested positive

Nope. I will lie about vax status. As long as the city has non science based policies, I will skirt my way around them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash, if a kid hasn't gotten it yet, they aren't getting it now.

So all those people who claimed they were spreading doses out, or were waiting for more data were lying?

Well, the new data that has come in since then hasn’t been great… not sure what I would do if I hadn’t already vaccinated my kids in November.

We decided to wait for our 5 year old. We are not anti vaxers by any stretch. All 4 of us in the house over 12 are vaccinated and boosted. I’m glad we decided to wait and see more data. As of now, we are not looking to vaccinate the 5 year old.

Yay! Now, let's get rid of the measles vaccine.

That one actually works for more than a month though.

NP. Exactly. What an epically stupid analogy.

- Parent of two fully vaccinated kids, including for Covid

+1. Also the measles vaccine is 97% effective for life. If they come out with something remotely that close for COVID, I will be the first in line for that for my 5 year old.