Charters: When is yours dropping the outdoor mask mandate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want to give a little time to see if the unmasking (combined with regular testing) leads to a lot of positives, which would keep a lot of kids out of school. What’s a couple weeks? Let the rest of DC experiment first.

You're saying that each individual charter leader is going to conduct a study that will quell the fears of the anxious parents in two weeks? Because charter leaders are epidemiologists or public health experts?

It gives those parents time to calm down. I am not one of them but I could have been.

Its not killing your kid to wear a mask for two more weeks. Also, its a charter. You are choosing to be there and now you are pissed they don't do what you say. Its not a private school. You can go IB but then gasp you will be around people in your neighborhood.

If national public health guidance, local public health guidance, the behavior of nearly all schools globally and nationally, and the behavior of most schools locally isn't enough to make them calm, what's two weeks going to do?

I wonder if there are parents that just believe that their charters will...uh....not lift the indoor mask mandates, particularly for 3-4 YOs. That's what parents in my charter are advocating for.

Parents at our charter do not seem to want PK3-4 to lift indoor mask mandates until a vaccine is available - which seems reasonable.

How is that reasonable when masks in that age group do approximately nothing, these kids are extremely low risk from Covid, we have no idea if the vaccine will be effective against transmission for more than a month? This is purely based on feelings.

It's also not reasonable because there's no guarantee that we'll ever get a vaccine for that age range. In fact, it's fairly unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want to give a little time to see if the unmasking (combined with regular testing) leads to a lot of positives, which would keep a lot of kids out of school. What’s a couple weeks? Let the rest of DC experiment first.

You're saying that each individual charter leader is going to conduct a study that will quell the fears of the anxious parents in two weeks? Because charter leaders are epidemiologists or public health experts?

It gives those parents time to calm down. I am not one of them but I could have been.

Its not killing your kid to wear a mask for two more weeks. Also, its a charter. You are choosing to be there and now you are pissed they don't do what you say. Its not a private school. You can go IB but then gasp you will be around people in your neighborhood.

If national public health guidance, local public health guidance, the behavior of nearly all schools globally and nationally, and the behavior of most schools locally isn't enough to make them calm, what's two weeks going to do?

I wonder if there are parents that just believe that their charters will...uh....not lift the indoor mask mandates, particularly for 3-4 YOs. That's what parents in my charter are advocating for.

Parents at our charter do not seem to want PK3-4 to lift indoor mask mandates until a vaccine is available - which seems reasonable.

How is that reasonable when masks in that age group do approximately nothing, these kids are extremely low risk from Covid, we have no idea if the vaccine will be effective against transmission for more than a month? This is purely based on feelings.

It's also not reasonable because there's no guarantee that we'll ever get a vaccine for that age range. In fact, it's fairly unlikely.

Nutty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want to give a little time to see if the unmasking (combined with regular testing) leads to a lot of positives, which would keep a lot of kids out of school. What’s a couple weeks? Let the rest of DC experiment first.

You're saying that each individual charter leader is going to conduct a study that will quell the fears of the anxious parents in two weeks? Because charter leaders are epidemiologists or public health experts?

It gives those parents time to calm down. I am not one of them but I could have been.

Its not killing your kid to wear a mask for two more weeks. Also, its a charter. You are choosing to be there and now you are pissed they don't do what you say. Its not a private school. You can go IB but then gasp you will be around people in your neighborhood.

If national public health guidance, local public health guidance, the behavior of nearly all schools globally and nationally, and the behavior of most schools locally isn't enough to make them calm, what's two weeks going to do?

I wonder if there are parents that just believe that their charters will...uh....not lift the indoor mask mandates, particularly for 3-4 YOs. That's what parents in my charter are advocating for.

Parents at our charter do not seem to want PK3-4 to lift indoor mask mandates until a vaccine is available - which seems reasonable.

How is that reasonable when masks in that age group do approximately nothing, these kids are extremely low risk from Covid, we have no idea if the vaccine will be effective against transmission for more than a month? This is purely based on feelings.

Because these are YOUR feelings, not facts. The science says that masks do filter and prevent some transmission. These kids are at risk (hospitalizations, death, etc.). The science of Pfizer augured for higher dosing - not dozing a six month old like 4.6 year old and Moderna has higher dosages, vaccines are pegged to particular strains, so vaccine is quite effective at Delta, less effective as to omicron, could be effective against deltacron -which is not yet here. PK3-4 are not required grades so if the antivax/mask crowd can home-school, etc. if they feel so strongly about it.

It's hard to comb through your gibberish, but no, these are not feelings, these are facts:

1. The best study we have on the effectiveness of in-school masking (I'm not talking about studies of masks in a lab, which tell us more about fabric quality than real life application) is the recent large one out of Spain, which showed that in-school transmission was actually higher in the mask cohort (age 6+) than in the unmasked cohort (age 5 and younger) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4046809
2. This recent study out of Germany, which is one of the best we have because it actually determines a true denominator based on seroprevalence, shows indeed an "extremely low risk" of severe outcomes in healthy children: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.30.21267048v1.full.pdf
3. At this point in the approval process, we have indeed no idea if we will ever have a vaccine for that age group that will be more effective than the one we have for the 5-11 year olds. We actually have no idea if we will ever have one at all, although I suspect we will, and I hope it will be be better. But your speculation about what we MIGHT get in the future doesn't refute the fact that at this point, WE HAVE NO IDEA, and given points 1 and 2, it doesn't seem reasonable to wait for it, considering the costs of masking for the youngest children in particular.

[Anonymous]

Another day, and a continuation of silence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another day, and a continuation of silence.

Have you been writing/calling to ask for an update?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another day, and a continuation of silence.

Have you been writing/calling to ask for an update?!

Yes.

[Anonymous]

What school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What school?

Yu Ying

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school?

Yu Ying

Jeeez. I won't complain about Lee making us wait another 5 weeks for indoor optional. That's rough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school?

Yu Ying

Jeeez. I won't complain about Lee making us wait another 5 weeks for indoor optional. That's rough.

That’s infuriating and so scientifically illiterate. I would lose faith in their ability to impart knowledge to my child, honestly. Sorry to hear that you and your family are subject to such irrationality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school?

Yu Ying

Jeeez. I won't complain about Lee making us wait another 5 weeks for indoor optional. That's rough.

That’s infuriating and so scientifically illiterate. I would lose faith in their ability to impart knowledge to my child, honestly. Sorry to hear that you and your family are subject to such irrationality.

NP. I wonder if this has something to do with the strong masking culture in Asia? Maybe Yu Ying wants to mask forever?

This is why this should never be left to individual schools, whose leaders are not public health experts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school?

Yu Ying

Jeeez. I won't complain about Lee making us wait another 5 weeks for indoor optional. That's rough.

That’s infuriating and so scientifically illiterate. I would lose faith in their ability to impart knowledge to my child, honestly. Sorry to hear that you and your family are subject to such irrationality.

NP. I wonder if this has something to do with the strong masking culture in Asia? Maybe Yu Ying wants to mask forever?

This is why this should never be left to individual schools, whose leaders are not public health experts.

Actually last year people were clamoring that decisions should be make by individual schools.

Seriously you like charter autonomy or you don’t. You can’t have it both ways

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school?

Yu Ying

Jeeez. I won't complain about Lee making us wait another 5 weeks for indoor optional. That's rough.

That’s infuriating and so scientifically illiterate. I would lose faith in their ability to impart knowledge to my child, honestly. Sorry to hear that you and your family are subject to such irrationality.

NP. I wonder if this has something to do with the strong masking culture in Asia? Maybe Yu Ying wants to mask forever?

This is why this should never be left to individual schools, whose leaders are not public health experts.

Actually last year people were clamoring that decisions should be make by individual schools.

Seriously you like charter autonomy or you don’t. You can’t have it both ways

I did not clamor for individual schools to make any decisions, whether at charters or DCPS. I thought last year that reopening should have been mandated by the Mayor, and that it was a terrible idea to pass the buck to every principal to come up with their own model. In the case of masks, vaccine mandates, and other public health measures, the guidance should come from the health department, and apply to all schools public and private, like it does in other countries. The guidance could be structured in a way that tailors it to the situation of individual schools based on vaccination rates (although I don't think that makes sense anymore), but the metrics should be set by the health department and be mandatory for all schools.

I am agnostic on charter autonomy as my kids attend DCPS, but whatever autonomy they have should not extend to policies that require public health expertise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP ours was dropped this week. So great to see all the faces of many kids and parents.

Inside or outside or both? Can you say where?

Our school has said NOTHING to parents and I am sure they must be getting questions daily. It's time. A friend in a purple area of NC is chaperoning an unmasked field trip for her K kid today. I feel sad we still can't give our kids any normalcy. And now is the time to do it because numbers may spike again at any time.

MV, outdoor mask dropped this week. Communication from school is they will update us by the end of the week regarding indoor mask. I predict it will be dropped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want to give a little time to see if the unmasking (combined with regular testing) leads to a lot of positives, which would keep a lot of kids out of school. What’s a couple weeks? Let the rest of DC experiment first.

You're saying that each individual charter leader is going to conduct a study that will quell the fears of the anxious parents in two weeks? Because charter leaders are epidemiologists or public health experts?

It gives those parents time to calm down. I am not one of them but I could have been.

Its not killing your kid to wear a mask for two more weeks. Also, its a charter. You are choosing to be there and now you are pissed they don't do what you say. Its not a private school. You can go IB but then gasp you will be around people in your neighborhood.

If national public health guidance, local public health guidance, the behavior of nearly all schools globally and nationally, and the behavior of most schools locally isn't enough to make them calm, what's two weeks going to do?

I wonder if there are parents that just believe that their charters will...uh....not lift the indoor mask mandates, particularly for 3-4 YOs. That's what parents in my charter are advocating for.

Parents at our charter do not seem to want PK3-4 to lift indoor mask mandates until a vaccine is available - which seems reasonable.

How is that reasonable when masks in that age group do approximately nothing, these kids are extremely low risk from Covid, we have no idea if the vaccine will be effective against transmission for more than a month? This is purely based on feelings.

Because these are YOUR feelings, not facts. The science says that masks do filter and prevent some transmission. These kids are at risk (hospitalizations, death, etc.). The science of Pfizer augured for higher dosing - not dozing a six month old like 4.6 year old and Moderna has higher dosages, vaccines are pegged to particular strains, so vaccine is quite effective at Delta, less effective as to omicron, could be effective against deltacron -which is not yet here. PK3-4 are not required grades so if the antivax/mask crowd can home-school, etc. if they feel so strongly about it.

It's hard to comb through your gibberish, but no, these are not feelings, these are facts:

1. The best study we have on the effectiveness of in-school masking (I'm not talking about studies of masks in a lab, which tell us more about fabric quality than real life application) is the recent large one out of Spain, which showed that in-school transmission was actually higher in the mask cohort (age 6+) than in the unmasked cohort (age 5 and younger) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4046809
2. This recent study out of Germany, which is one of the best we have because it actually determines a true denominator based on seroprevalence, shows indeed an "extremely low risk" of severe outcomes in healthy children: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.30.21267048v1.full.pdf
3. At this point in the approval process, we have indeed no idea if we will ever have a vaccine for that age group that will be more effective than the one we have for the 5-11 year olds. We actually have no idea if we will ever have one at all, although I suspect we will, and I hope it will be be better. But your speculation about what we MIGHT get in the future doesn't refute the fact that at this point, WE HAVE NO IDEA, and given points 1 and 2, it doesn't seem reasonable to wait for it, considering the costs of masking for the youngest children in particular.

Hard to read through your word salad - you seem to cling to partial studies. That said, there is no actual study that says that there is a cost of masking for young children - but you, narcissism on fleek, FEEL there is. Even the CDC (whose vaccine recommendations you discount) has repeatedly stated that there is zero evidence that masking impairs emotional or language development in children.