Why aren’t schools with high COVID rates masking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

That’s probably the poster that thinks people shouldn’t have kids unless the can have a stay-at-home parent.

Yep. School is just daycare, and we can’t stand to be around our kids so we send them. I thought this was a universal truth.

Too bad the SAHMs can't force policy for another year. Then MoCo would be rid of Covid.

MoCo would be rid of covid with responsible behavior including masking at school. It has nothing to do with SAH. If you want your free day care to be safe you need to be part of the solution and not just the problem.

And, a working parent manages the virtual so good try.

And this is why we can’t have nice things.

[Anonymous]

This discussion has become ridiculous, but an interesting issue is being raised: the impact of masking for younger children who are in before and aftercare and, therefore, required to mask for many hours per day.

All children must attend public school (unless other arrangements are made). Nearly everyone agrees that virtual schooling is not a long-term solution for most kids and works very poorly for many. Given that COVID is here to stay and we are currently in a surge, it is fair to say "no masks" in school at all during periods of significant community spread simply because some kids attend before and aftercare.

I wish more people were reasonable and not screaming about being done with masks. Masks should be worn by those with symptoms, those returning after being positive, and those who have been exposed (although I could live without that). If people embrace only the "no masks required" part of the CDC guidance but completely ignore the advice about staying home when sick, testing, and masking with a high-quality mask when you have symptoms or when returning or if a close contact, some cases could be prevented. Sure, one-way masking offers personal protection, but it is less effective when so there are so many cases and when people feel entitled to send maskless kids to school or to ignore testing and isolation advice. You can't wear an N-95 for an entire day without eating or drinking some water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

That’s probably the poster that thinks people shouldn’t have kids unless the can have a stay-at-home parent.

Yep. School is just daycare, and we can’t stand to be around our kids so we send them. I thought this was a universal truth.

Too bad the SAHMs can't force policy for another year. Then MoCo would be rid of Covid.

MoCo would be rid of covid with responsible behavior including masking at school. It has nothing to do with SAH. If you want your free day care to be safe you need to be part of the solution and not just the problem.

And, a working parent manages the virtual so good try.

Rid of covid? Do you really believe that? For someone who spends so much time obsessing over covid, you seem to have very little understanding of transmission and infection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This discussion has become ridiculous, but an interesting issue is being raised: the impact of masking for younger children who are in before and aftercare and, therefore, required to mask for many hours per day.

All children must attend public school (unless other arrangements are made). Nearly everyone agrees that virtual schooling is not a long-term solution for most kids and works very poorly for many. Given that COVID is here to stay and we are currently in a surge, it is fair to say "no masks" in school at all during periods of significant community spread simply because some kids attend before and aftercare.

I wish more people were reasonable and not screaming about being done with masks. Masks should be worn by those with symptoms, those returning after being positive, and those who have been exposed (although I could live without that). If people embrace only the "no masks required" part of the CDC guidance but completely ignore the advice about staying home when sick, testing, and masking with a high-quality mask when you have symptoms or when returning or if a close contact, some cases could be prevented. Sure, one-way masking offers personal protection, but it is less effective when so there are so many cases and when people feel entitled to send maskless kids to school or to ignore testing and isolation advice. You can't wear an N-95 for an entire day without eating or drinking some water.

I suspect many of us who are reasonable are worn out by so-called “reasonable” demands. If kids had the option for in-person starting in September 2020, or been able to return without masks in September 2021, I think you’d see more flexibility now. But the policies have been so restrictive, for so long that even many reasonable people are just… done. That’s the problem with focusing solely on the trees and missing the forest. Most people won’t indefinitely comply with restrictions *especially* when the most dire predictions haven’t been borne out. When you cry wolf repeatedly that schools are death traps, and it turns out they aren’t anything close, and you STILL insist they are, well, you get where we are now.

When my DH tested positive at home, we immediately rapid tested the kids (all vaccinated, all in elementary). They were negative, so we sent them in wearing KN95s. That’s reasonable. Not reasonable: insisting they should quarantine at home for 10 days, even though they don’t have COVID.

Similarly, it’s not reasonable to expect kids who have zero COVID symptoms, especially when vaccinated, to wear masks for… how long, exactly? Until some segment of the population is “comfortable”? Enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?” [/quote

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

Then why are you obsessed with the kids who attend in person masking again? Weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This discussion has become ridiculous, but an interesting issue is being raised: the impact of masking for younger children who are in before and aftercare and, therefore, required to mask for many hours per day.

All children must attend public school (unless other arrangements are made). Nearly everyone agrees that virtual schooling is not a long-term solution for most kids and works very poorly for many. Given that COVID is here to stay and we are currently in a surge, it is fair to say "no masks" in school at all during periods of significant community spread simply because some kids attend before and aftercare.

I wish more people were reasonable and not screaming about being done with masks. Masks should be worn by those with symptoms, those returning after being positive, and those who have been exposed (although I could live without that). If people embrace only the "no masks required" part of the CDC guidance but completely ignore the advice about staying home when sick, testing, and masking with a high-quality mask when you have symptoms or when returning or if a close contact, some cases could be prevented. Sure, one-way masking offers personal protection, but it is less effective when so there are so many cases and when people feel entitled to send maskless kids to school or to ignore testing and isolation advice. You can't wear an N-95 for an entire day without eating or drinking some water.

For young kids especially, I don’t think it’s appropriate for them to mask 5 days per week for an indefinite period of time, regardless if there is an extra 1-2 hours of before/aftercare. Same goes for toddlers/preschool aged kids attending daycare. What seemed a reasonable course of action for a few months early in the pandemic gets more unreasonable the longer this goes on. Because even though you guys retort “no one is saying forever” your end date is always based on something like “when we know more about long Covid”, etc.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that you shouldn’t keep your kids home when sick or not have them mask if they’ve been exposed or are returning from a Covid infection. Those are perfectly good reasons to wear a mask for a few days. What we are against are these blanket mandates- the minimal benefit derived is not worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

That’s probably the poster that thinks people shouldn’t have kids unless the can have a stay-at-home parent.

Yep. School is just daycare, and we can’t stand to be around our kids so we send them. I thought this was a universal truth.

Too bad the SAHMs can't force policy for another year. Then MoCo would be rid of Covid.

MoCo would be rid of covid with responsible behavior including masking at school. It has nothing to do with SAH. If you want your free day care to be safe you need to be part of the solution and not just the problem.

And, a working parent manages the virtual so good try.

PP I am really glad to hear you stuck with virtual because it sounds like a great option for you! What field do you work in? I’m thinking about a switch to a flexible WAH job so I can homeschool too. MCPS has been terrible. Do you have any advice for multitasking? That’s what I struggled with last year. Was thinking about asking my PCP for an ADHD evaluation to see if some meds might be appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

Not the PP but most parents I know who thought virtual was A-OK are feds. It would fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

Not the PP but most parents I know who thought virtual was A-OK are feds. It would fit.

Okay, I could certainly see that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

I already asked PP how a doctor and scientist could stay at home. So far no answer. But I have a sneaking suspicion if she does come back, it will be something along the lines of “get a new job” or “use up all your leave” or some other delightful piece of wisdom on how easy it is to make work from home doable. Maybe we can contact NIH and have them install a BSL 3 lab in our basement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

Not the PP but most parents I know who thought virtual was A-OK are feds. It would fit.

Okay, I could certainly see that.

LOL - I’m a Fed, as are many of my neighbors (mostly NIH and FDA). NONE of us thought virtual was okay. None.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

Not the PP but most parents I know who thought virtual was A-OK are feds. It would fit.

Okay, I could certainly see that.

LOL - I’m a Fed, as are many of my neighbors (mostly NIH and FDA). NONE of us thought virtual was okay. None.

Virtual was equal opportunity terrible for all. Some SAHMs loved the helicopter opportunity it provided, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

I already asked PP how a doctor and scientist could stay at home. So far no answer. But I have a sneaking suspicion if she does come back, it will be something along the lines of “get a new job” or “use up all your leave” or some other delightful piece of wisdom on how easy it is to make work from home doable. Maybe we can contact NIH and have them install a BSL 3 lab in our basement?

She probably “works” as an MLM consultant or something of that nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people have already had it. Because vaccines have been available to almost all age groups for a long, long time now. Because it’s generally mild for most people, particularly those who are vaccinated.

Perhaps most important, because we need to maintain some capital for requiring masks in the future if a variant emerges that is more harmful to children than this variant. It’s been over two years of disruption. It’s been, what, two months of kids being able to forego masks? Even here, most people don’t have the appetite for restrictions anymore, given the current conditions.

Masking in school reduces some transmission, but thinking that they’re incredibly effective is misinformed.

Please show me evidence for your last statement.

Please show me evidence that they ARE highly effective in K-12 school settings. The burden of proof is on the intervention.

OP, I understand that you're upset, but denigrating people doesn't help. And, as someone pointed out, the school with the highest COVID rate *is* masking. If you're hoping for a return to MCPS-wide mask mandates, you're unlikely to get one now.

Sure, here you go.

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/mask-mandates-cut-covid-19-spread-in-schools-studies-find/2022/03

I’m not some pro mask hack - I hate wearing a KN95 as much as the next person - but the Pediatrics Duke study shows that schools with universal masking had nearly 90 percent lower infection rates. That seems pretty convincing.

Thanks - I hadn't seen that one before. It's one study, of course, and there are others that don't have results as convincing. Plenty of kids got Omicron during January 2022 here, and we had a mask mandate in place, so there's also that.

Again, the larger point about maintaining political capital for future restrictions is important here. There are many, many people, even in MoCo, who no longer support universal mask mandates. If you want them to cooperate in the future, you can't push them too hard now. Does it suck for some people? Yes. Might it suck even harder in the future if we push mask mandates again now, and people refuse to cooperate with other public health measures? Also yes.

I mean, if MCPS had reopened in-person, or at least *offered* the option back in September 2021, they would have gained some capital with parents who wanted in-person. But they didn't, and partially because of that decision (among others), here we are.

Here’s where I come out: assuming the choice is get covid/my kids get covid or wear a n-95 7 hours a day for years I would get covid. Every time. I would get it twice a year if that was the choice. So there isn’t any data on mask effectiveness that could sway me. I am happy to assume they are 100% effective. I’m still not depriving my kids of fresh air and a normal childhood. And for the record we have not masked anywhere since the mandates lifted and have not gotten covid so this idea that you’ll get it more than once or twice a year seems wrong.

Your children's only access to fresh air comes during the school day? Wow.

If her kids are in before school care, school, after school care and don't get home till 6-7 she has bigger issues than fresh air. Poor kids. They see their parents maybe an hour or two a day and know they aren't really wanted.

This is why your crowd (the restriction/mandate crowd) isn't taken seriously. You think that because you have a WFH/SAHM situation, everybody else should just suck it up and align with you. Your crowd has been a bunch of selfish clowns from day one. And thankfully, leadership has finally tuned you out. Which is why we have all the whining and wailing on this board now.

FFS, can we please stop lumping WFH and SAH together? Please? Those of us who work from home are WORKING (except when they take days off). The WFH families we know, ours included, do use before and/or aftercare because, again, we're WORKING and no, we can't all magically stagger our hours every day to fit neatly in the six hour box MCPS grants us, never mind the random days off, half days, etc. Jesus, people.

Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. WFH had it "slightly" easier last year because at least the childcare was technically covered, but the educational experience was still a complete disaster because of the need to focus on work.

Well it was also a complete disaster because staring at a screen for hours per day is not effective way to learn for many kids (or even advised),

With the right supports, it absolutely can work.

Before the pandemic, it was widely advised that kids be limited to 2hrs screentime per day. Is that no longer a thing?

School is not exactly screen time and lets be real, most kids when they are older do far more than that a day. And, they all have computers in MCPS schools so you are kidding yourself to think your kids are not on the computer all day at school.

I’m an elementary teacher (and I have a DC at a different ES). My class is not in the computer all day. More than 10 years ago? Absolutely. But nothing like virtual learning. I’m guessing you have high schoolers if you think virtual was NBD. It was terrible for ES.

We did it in es and it was no big deal. Covid was a blessing for one child as the school year was a waste with multiple long term subs and then a bad teacher. We basically had to homeschool the entire year.

So did you homeschool or participate in MCPS virtual with your horrible teacher? I’m confused. Your writing skills are poor.

We did both. Your writing skills are pretty bad too.

DP- you thought virtual for ES was no big deal despite having to homeschool concurrently? You don’t see how to others that would be a “big deal?”

Yes, it’s not a big deal. We are still in virtual so clearly I have no issue with it. In person prevovid with a bad teacher was far worse.

You stay at home? You think everybody can do this?

We made it work, and so could you if you tried.

What do you do for a living?

I already asked PP how a doctor and scientist could stay at home. So far no answer. But I have a sneaking suspicion if she does come back, it will be something along the lines of “get a new job” or “use up all your leave” or some other delightful piece of wisdom on how easy it is to make work from home doable. Maybe we can contact NIH and have them install a BSL 3 lab in our basement?

She probably “works” as an MLM consultant or something of that nature.

Oh absolutely not. She has a demanding job, makes 7 figures, volunteers 20 hours a week, home cooks every meal from scratch, cleaning the baseboards is in her weekly cleaning rotation, sits on several boards, takes care of her and her husbands aging parents…you know. She’s freakin’ amazeballs! And the only person on all of DCUM that actually loves her kids.