Masks optional by spring break

[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:
What does highly vaccinated mean? It worked for Delta but now these vaccines need to be reformulated for the new variants. Basic precautions are social distancing, masking and testing. The same as its always been. We just got out of a huge surge. To keep numbers down, we should continue to take precautions until new vaccines are available and we know they work with transmission.

Nope. The original Pfizer and Moderna vaccines work well against the variants, including omicron. No need to reformulate. We're good. You're good, I'm good, we're good.

What are the basic precautions we take against measles or chicken pox? Vaccines. Same for covid. The same as its always been.

Measles and chicken pox viruses don't drift - no variants. Apples and orangutans.

Do you think before you post? By your logic masks should stay.

Chicken Pox:
https://www.webmd.com/children/what-is-chickenpox
"How Is It Spread? Very easily. You can get the virus by breathing in particles that come from chickenpox blisters or by touching something on which the particles landed."
That means its not only air born but on the surface so we should go back to extra cleanings as well.

Measles:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/8584-measles
"Contaminated droplets that are spread through the air when you cough, sneeze or talk."

The only difference is those vaccine actually are working!

No. Chicken pox and measles have been endemic in human populations for thousands of years. The novel coronavirus, as covid was first known, was called " novel" because it was novel--meaning it had never been seen before in any population. Our bodies had no defense. Their defenses are still tenuous.

While methods of transmission are much the same, and the new variant is as contagious as measles, if not moreso (a prospect that made epidemiologists break out into a cold sweat a year ago), it is not measles. Its long-term effects seem to be notably worse for a notably larger population than measles, even when initially it's just "sniffles."

This is known.

Again, this mask thing is bread and circuses run by sociopaths who are betting it will help them win elections and (bonus!) kill off more of the minority populations they don't like. These people are really that bad. At the end of the day, actual logic would dictate that we may be able to drop masks in schools soon... if new variants don't emerge and assuming cases continue to fall. But the rhetoric that it is harmful to children to mask is being pushed hysterically *Right Now* because Koch and Cato have issued marching orders and unleashed their hounds to make it so.

This is theater, not science.

The great Covid denier.

Hardly. I'm trying to be rational. So many people have suffered and died. I don't think you read my most carefully if you think I'm a covid denier.

If the rate is below 3%, then I suppose lifting some restrictions might be okay. I'm still uneasy about schools. But we can take the attitude we've taken so far, where your kids go first.

DP and I don't think you're a COVID denier, but I do think you're exaggerating the risks of COVID vs. other health outcomes, and specifically those risks to children. To claim that our bodies had "no" defenses against COVID-19 isn't correct; if that were true, everyone who contracted it would have died. This country in general, and MoCo/MCPS in particular, took a sledgehammer approach to COVID. After two years of that, we need more precision and nuance in our policies and in our messaging.

You're not rational when you claim that people who want to consider ending mask mandates for children are Cato- and Koch-funded hounds. You're the one making it into theater. The fact is, we need to talk about what metrics we'd want to see, and what factors we're considering, in making masks optional in schools. That's not theatrics, it's reality. Public health cannot be solely about COVID prevention.

Perhaps my claim was imprecise, is what I meant. Our bodies had never seen covid before was all I was trying to say.

However the irony is, had covid been as hot of a virus as, say, SARS, we would not be having this argument because it wouldn't have been spread so carelessly. The real danger with covid is that it doesn't kill or cripple everyone. Polio didn't either. Neither did measles. Unfortunately, so many seem to take the attitude that since it didn't kill *them,* it's all fine and harmless. But 3.300 Americans dying yesterday isn't a mild virus. Even if it was NBD for you, you are a link in the chain that brings suffering to others. I completely understand sending kids to school and carrying in with life--we're traveling this summer come hell or high water--but I don't understand why you wouldn't take preventative measures right now, just as you'd take precautions while driving your car, or having unprotected sex with a prostitute. (I figure at least one of those comparisons might be something you can find relatable.)

I'm thrilled that the metrics are good. They're better than I expected and that's fantastic. Huzzah.

That also doesn't mean that masking or not masking isn't being weaponized in a way that has nothing to do with public health. You only need look at vast amount of misinformation that's been pushed here (and here it's mild compared to Twitter and other social media sites), to note that there's a coordinated effort going on to tie this all to the gender wars, CRT, and all the other *scary* threats that are apparently threatening our children. Masks are tyranny! Overturn those school boards! There's a host of covid disinformation rolling along with that that's going to make it very difficult to put the genie back in the bottle should we have another serious surge.

While I am perfectly willing to discuss relaxing some restrictions with people who believe covid is a real thing, I think we need to realize that relaxing restrictions may make numbers go back up, and that in doing so we will be putting other people at risk. I know for you that seems to be Tuesday, and life is risk. All the other platitudes you've thrown around obviously work on your conscience. It's a bit harder for my high school bud T, the single dad who lost his wife to cancer who just started chemo himself. It's a bit harder for M, my friend who's a high school teacher with a toddler who's too young to be vaccinated. Kinda sucks for my aunt with lupus, too.

"But what's the altnernative?" You cry. "Should we be masked forever?"

No. I'm optimistic that we might be out of this hellscape in the spring. But I don't see the point in rushing headlong in. Not getting the under fives vaccinated first seems insane, for one. Establishing a coherent testing policy to catch it if cases start up again also seems wise. I'd also recommend doing something to counteract the Cato trolls who have hijacked public health for their own ends.

+1

Why do you feel it is necessary to wait for vaccines for the under five crowd? Their actual risk for long COVID or hospitalization will likely be very very similar after vaccination because their actual risk is so low. It’s going to be a big challenge for manufacturers to show improvement over that starting risk level. You should look up the actual rates of hospitalization or death for young children in Maryland; high rates of adult vaccination help some too. If you are worried about spread well vaccination does stop that completely either so while it might be a good thing I don’t understand why it’s “insane” to feel like vaccination availability for this group is not really that important to public health overall especially divorced from overall case rates and hospital capacity.

Because under 5 don't live alone?????????? This week our neighbor's entire family is home with COVID transmitted to home from preschooler. Parents can't work, siblings can't go to school, but really why give a crap about other people? Let them lose their jobs and let their kids miss school. This is now a poor persons pandemic. The rich don't give a f&*%.

Well I can’t convince you I’m not a jerk but my thinking is two fold: that child absolutely could have brought COVID home if they were vaccinated (although yes the likelihood they would would be reduced) and also I don’t think we should be doing long quarantines for COVID anymore. Kids get sick and they should not go to school sick, of course, but a few days home for actual symptoms is very different than the sequential 10 day quarantines that have been crippling families including mine. Plus any child can go to school in a kn95 if their parents really want them to.

You can't reason with right-wing extremists about masks or anything.

Yes, the right wing extremists governors of NJ, DE, CT, OR, and etc, etc, etc who rescinded mask mandates for schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a #2.

1. Associate temporary virtual learning with "closing schools"
2. Convince others to drop all covid protections (masks, vaccines, etc.) even if the pandemic is ongoing
3. Downplay any indication that MCPS is the source of covid outbreaks (ex. unmasking in school cafeterias)
4. Associate covid is the same as the flu (and downplay any associated effects to hospitals, teachers, elderly, etc.)
5. Blame anyone except MCPS for policy issues (no responsibility)
6. Convince others that unconditional in-person-learning-only (no temporary virtual at all during covid spikes or if a child is in quarrantine) supporters are greater than 5% (at least according to the January poll)
7. Make fake associations to the false data with credible / reputable sources to give the themes credibility (ex. the sources never said that or it was wildly exaggerated)
8. Ensure compromise suggestions such as a hybrid solution are deleted or discredited.

This is number 2

1) Equate any rational discourse about removing mandates as people Koch puppets or Hitler
2) Insist that masks need to continue until forever because....reasons.
3) Claim their kids love wearing masks and if yours don't you a terrible garbage lazy parent
4) claim their kids love virtual school and if yours didn't like it you're a garbage lazy parent who just wanted free childcare
5) Bring up random statistics for India, Mississippi or other places that are not Montgomery County Maryland.
6) Claim that vaccines don't work. Oh trust and believe their still triple vaxxed but don't trust the vaccines too much!
7) Assume that there's another varient out there that could be vaccine resistant

[Anonymous]

New variant not good: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/17/health/ba-2-covid-severity/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a #2.

1. Associate temporary virtual learning with "closing schools"
2. Convince others to drop all covid protections (masks, vaccines, etc.) even if the pandemic is ongoing
3. Downplay any indication that MCPS is the source of covid outbreaks (ex. unmasking in school cafeterias)
4. Associate covid is the same as the flu (and downplay any associated effects to hospitals, teachers, elderly, etc.)
5. Blame anyone except MCPS for policy issues (no responsibility)
6. Convince others that unconditional in-person-learning-only (no temporary virtual at all during covid spikes or if a child is in quarrantine) supporters are greater than 5% (at least according to the January poll)
7. Make fake associations to the false data with credible / reputable sources to give the themes credibility (ex. the sources never said that or it was wildly exaggerated)
8. Ensure compromise suggestions such as a hybrid solution are deleted or discredited.

This is number 2

1) Equate any rational discourse about removing mandates as people Koch puppets or Hitler
2) Insist that masks need to continue until forever because....reasons.
3) Claim their kids love wearing masks and if yours don't you a terrible garbage lazy parent
4) claim their kids love virtual school and if yours didn't like it you're a garbage lazy parent who just wanted free childcare
5) Bring up random statistics for India, Mississippi or other places that are not Montgomery County Maryland.
6) Claim that vaccines don't work. Oh trust and believe their still triple vaxxed but don't trust the vaccines too much!
7) Assume that there's another varient out there that could be vaccine resistant

I started to own you point by point in this thread but I did something with my browser and it erased my post just as I was drafting a response to 7. Upon reconsidering, it's not worth retyping. Your reasoning here is flawed, childish, inane, and still just promoting #2 as the PP said.

No one wants to mask forever.

Vaccines do work. They don't work forever, or even very long. And while a mask is mostly about protecting others from you, a vaccine is mostly about protecting you from others. You can be vaccinated and still. Spread covid. And I am sure you are and do.

Covid didn't originate in Maryland (or are you saying it did? A lot of your Q friends think so too!). But it came here. So will new strains.

Viruses mutate. New variants happen. There's one that's kinda vaccine resist and test-evading now.

[Anonymous]

I hope that MCPS continues the mask mandate.

[Anonymous]

When is the mask mandate coming off? What needs to happen to make it come off as soon as possible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When is the mask mandate coming off? What needs to happen to make it come off as soon as possible?

Just give up, little puppet. We are all tired of your disinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When is the mask mandate coming off? What needs to happen to make it come off as soon as possible?

Your guess is a good as mine

[Anonymous]

Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

We've been making school policy based entirely on the feelings of a small segment of the population that is either genuinely high risk or suffers from health anxiety (sometimes a combination). The problem is that there are real downsides to masking (especially the youngest children and those with speech delays and social anxiety). So we need to start making policy based on science, and the science (and I'm talking about randomized studies taking place in the real world, not lab experiments) and the experts are clearly saying that cloth masks do not play a large role in preventing the transmission of COVID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

We've been making school policy based entirely on the feelings of a small segment of the population that is either genuinely high risk or suffers from health anxiety (sometimes a combination). The problem is that there are real downsides to masking (especially the youngest children and those with speech delays and social anxiety). So we need to start making policy based on science, and the science (and I'm talking about randomized studies taking place in the real world, not lab experiments) and the experts are clearly saying that cloth masks do not play a large role in preventing the transmission of COVID.

Ok. Fine, make masks optional for young children. What are the real downsides or harms caused by teenagers wearing masks in school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

We've been making school policy based entirely on the feelings of a small segment of the population that is either genuinely high risk or suffers from health anxiety (sometimes a combination). The problem is that there are real downsides to masking (especially the youngest children and those with speech delays and social anxiety). So we need to start making policy based on science, and the science (and I'm talking about randomized studies taking place in the real world, not lab experiments) and the experts are clearly saying that cloth masks do not play a large role in preventing the transmission of COVID.

Ok. Fine, make masks optional for young children. What are the real downsides or harms caused by teenagers wearing masks in school?

Thank you for grudgingly agreeing to consider the needs of children with special needs. How incredible generous of you.

What are the downsides for teenagers? Why don't you ask them? Instead of assuming everyone will be happy to cover their noses and mouths all day just to make you FEEL better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

We've been making school policy based entirely on the feelings of a small segment of the population that is either genuinely high risk or suffers from health anxiety (sometimes a combination). The problem is that there are real downsides to masking (especially the youngest children and those with speech delays and social anxiety). So we need to start making policy based on science, and the science (and I'm talking about randomized studies taking place in the real world, not lab experiments) and the experts are clearly saying that cloth masks do not play a large role in preventing the transmission of COVID.

Ok. Fine, make masks optional for young children. What are the real downsides or harms caused by teenagers wearing masks in school?

That’s fine with me. I only have young kids so I will let people with teenagers weigh in on that. I imagine it’s not as big of a deal for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

We've been making school policy based entirely on the feelings of a small segment of the population that is either genuinely high risk or suffers from health anxiety (sometimes a combination). The problem is that there are real downsides to masking (especially the youngest children and those with speech delays and social anxiety). So we need to start making policy based on science, and the science (and I'm talking about randomized studies taking place in the real world, not lab experiments) and the experts are clearly saying that cloth masks do not play a large role in preventing the transmission of COVID.

Ok. Fine, make masks optional for young children. What are the real downsides or harms caused by teenagers wearing masks in school?

Thank you for grudgingly agreeing to consider the needs of children with special needs. How incredible generous of you.

What are the downsides for teenagers? Why don't you ask them? Instead of assuming everyone will be happy to cover their noses and mouths all day just to make you FEEL better.

You are the one talking about science. I agree that when community spread is low, we should consider making masks optional for the youngest learners. I have three teenagers and they do not object to wearing masks at school. It doesn't bother them. I am asking you what the science says about harm to teenagers caused by wearing masks at school? I have seen nothing on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scrolled through as many pages as I could tolerate, and I don't think I saw a comment showing any empathy for the teachers and their family who are in older higher risk groups.

I've spoken to a lot of teachers at publics, daycares, and privates and anecdotally I'd say half are terrified of mask removal. This can't be dismissed.

We've been making school policy based entirely on the feelings of a small segment of the population that is either genuinely high risk or suffers from health anxiety (sometimes a combination). The problem is that there are real downsides to masking (especially the youngest children and those with speech delays and social anxiety). So we need to start making policy based on science, and the science (and I'm talking about randomized studies taking place in the real world, not lab experiments) and the experts are clearly saying that cloth masks do not play a large role in preventing the transmission of COVID.

Last spring everyone was terrified about returning to in person school and sure that everyone would quit and it was FINE. Doing something different is stressful. Being irrationally afraid is not ok forever.