Just received word that masks during game play are no longer required at the Soccerplex!

[Anonymous]

We’ve reached the point where people who say masks are bad or don’t help have as much credibility as people that think the earth is flat, or that the moon is made of cheese.

[Anonymous]

Wasn’t there a study early on in the pandemic from a hospital in Boston that showed that COVID infections among staff went down dramatically when everyone (including nurses and doctors in non-COVID wards, visitors, admin) all wore masks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t there a study early on in the pandemic from a hospital in Boston that showed that COVID infections among staff went down dramatically when everyone (including nurses and doctors in non-COVID wards, visitors, admin) all wore masks?

Yes: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768533

[Anonymous]

MSI seems to be keeping the mask rule in place for now, and some travel team have not notified parents of a rule change while others have said masks are no longer required.

Does this mean its just up to each individual club now? Or is there going to be an official MOCO announcement? My DC's travel team has not lifted the mask rule, but some of her friends' teams have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this isn't a link to a study but there are links in the article. Masks work.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

None of the links in the article lead to a study showing masks work. The evidence in favor of masks is very poor. It boils down to the fact that in some cases where amsks were introduced case rates have fallen. However correlation is very weak evidence, as there were many plausible reasons for cases to fall - and there are plenty of other data samples where mask rules not correlated with such a change. In other words - what this article is calling evidence is not evidence at all - and it is the opposite of science. The whole erason for having a scientific method is precisely that correlation proves nothing. and this is obviosuly doubly true when you can only even show correlation by cherry picking your evidence. This is witchcraft, not science.

The evidence against masks on the other hand is based on fourteen randomized controlled studies. In other words actual science experiments where you have a control group and an experimental group - bith of which are subject to identical circumstances except for the variable you intend to measure. There have been fourteen such studies done on the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of respiratory diseases, performed with scientific rigor and fully peer-reviewed. Every single one has shown no measurable effect. None.

Don’t bother. It’s falling on deaf ears and little brains. Their source is the Washington Post, which ran a long article tonight on the high risks of flight, noting that 9000 people had been potentially exposed to 160 flyers known to have had a COVID (though the article notes with frustration how nobody has been shown to have caught it among the 9000 from flight transmission). Sounds like a lot of people exposed, right? Of course the article fails to mention how many total flyers there were over the course of the CDC study because the concept of relative risk is completely at odds with the Posts agenda to shut everything down except the Treasury (for writing checks) and the Washington Post. They have educated their readers just as they wanted, which basically means scientifically and statistically illiterate and innumerate.

your tin foil hats- do you buy them or make them yourselves?

Reference to tinfoil hats - is that more of your science? No - it's a logical fallacy - argumentam ad hominem - you do it because you can't actually counter the argument with evidence or science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t there a study early on in the pandemic from a hospital in Boston that showed that COVID infections among staff went down dramatically when everyone (including nurses and doctors in non-COVID wards, visitors, admin) all wore masks?

Yes: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768533

This is exactly the sort of study which is the opposite of good science. It notes a correlation between mask wearing and test results (which could stem for dozens of different causes) and makes no attempt to control for any of the other variables. Science would require two otherwise-identical populations with one group wearing masks and one not. This study simply notes a correlation and equates it to causation.

In fact no special cause at all is required to explain the results, the test results amongst the health care worker population simply followed the normal infection curve of a respiratory disease. The study notes that the health care workers' test rates fell ahead of the general population - but that is hardly surprising since one would expect a disease to spread and then decline amongst health care wrokers ahead of the general population.

How would you determine for sure whether the correlation resulting from this study is actually causation? you would conduct a randomized controlled trial where two identical groups are exposed to identical conditions with the only difference being that one group wears masks and the other doesn't. It turns out that fourteen such trials have been conducted. Every single one of them revealed no measurable difference.

[Anonymous]

The rules for reopening/operating in MontCo are pretty clear - not sure why soccer should be a carve out. If you won't want your athlete to wear a mask, go play in a state that doesn't require one.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/face-coverings.html

Do I have to wear a mask while exercising?
Masks are required when exercising indoors at a gym or fitness center. Masks are also required outdoors when exercising, when it is difficult to maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance between you and others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The rules for reopening/operating in MontCo are pretty clear - not sure why soccer should be a carve out. If you won't want your athlete to wear a mask, go play in a state that doesn't require one.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/face-coverings.html

Do I have to wear a mask while exercising?
Masks are required when exercising indoors at a gym or fitness center. Masks are also required outdoors when exercising, when it is difficult to maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance between you and others.

And this:
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/reopening/requirements/sports.html

All sports participants, regardless of age, must comply with the face covering requirement and social distancing and hygiene requirements. The County follows the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations regarding the use of face coverings during vigorous activities.

All sports are categorized by level of risk as detailed in the Maryland Sports Commission Return to Play Committee Report.

All sports, regardless of whether they are indoor or outdoor, are limited to low- and medium-risk sports. High-risk sports may engage in practice that involves skills-building and drills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this isn't a link to a study but there are links in the article. Masks work.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

None of the links in the article lead to a study showing masks work. The evidence in favor of masks is very poor. It boils down to the fact that in some cases where amsks were introduced case rates have fallen. However correlation is very weak evidence, as there were many plausible reasons for cases to fall - and there are plenty of other data samples where mask rules not correlated with such a change. In other words - what this article is calling evidence is not evidence at all - and it is the opposite of science. The whole erason for having a scientific method is precisely that correlation proves nothing. and this is obviosuly doubly true when you can only even show correlation by cherry picking your evidence. This is witchcraft, not science.

The evidence against masks on the other hand is based on fourteen randomized controlled studies. In other words actual science experiments where you have a control group and an experimental group - bith of which are subject to identical circumstances except for the variable you intend to measure. There have been fourteen such studies done on the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of respiratory diseases, performed with scientific rigor and fully peer-reviewed. Every single one has shown no measurable effect. None.

Don’t bother. It’s falling on deaf ears and little brains. Their source is the Washington Post, which ran a long article tonight on the high risks of flight, noting that 9000 people had been potentially exposed to 160 flyers known to have had a COVID (though the article notes with frustration how nobody has been shown to have caught it among the 9000 from flight transmission). Sounds like a lot of people exposed, right? Of course the article fails to mention how many total flyers there were over the course of the CDC study because the concept of relative risk is completely at odds with the Posts agenda to shut everything down except the Treasury (for writing checks) and the Washington Post. They have educated their readers just as they wanted, which basically means scientifically and statistically illiterate and innumerate.

your tin foil hats- do you buy them or make them yourselves?

Reference to tinfoil hats - is that more of your science? No - it's a logical fallacy - argumentam ad hominem - you do it because you can't actually counter the argument with evidence or science.

This has a good discussion on masks (and lack of actual evidence); links throughout to other commentary; specific assessment of claims/studies/models: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MSI seems to be keeping the mask rule in place for now, and some travel team have not notified parents of a rule change while others have said masks are no longer required.

Does this mean its just up to each individual club now? Or is there going to be an official MOCO announcement? My DC's travel team has not lifted the mask rule, but some of her friends' teams have.

Already seeing rule modifications on a team by case team basis by team for travel teams. I think that's okay. Whatever makes each team comfortable according to what is going on in their area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The rules for reopening/operating in MontCo are pretty clear - not sure why soccer should be a carve out. If you won't want your athlete to wear a mask, go play in a state that doesn't require one.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/face-coverings.html

Do I have to wear a mask while exercising?
Masks are required when exercising indoors at a gym or fitness center. Masks are also required outdoors when exercising, when it is difficult to maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance between you and others.

go somewhere else, you seem to be out of your league in this discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The rules for reopening/operating in MontCo are pretty clear - not sure why soccer should be a carve out. If you won't want your athlete to wear a mask, go play in a state that doesn't require one.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/face-coverings.html

Do I have to wear a mask while exercising?
Masks are required when exercising indoors at a gym or fitness center. Masks are also required outdoors when exercising, when it is difficult to maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance between you and others.

go somewhere else, you seem to be out of your league in this discussion.

"out of my league" because my kid is not such a wimp that he/she cannot exercise in a mask. we are all good - masks and all. hope teams that refuse to wear them are required to forfeit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The rules for reopening/operating in MontCo are pretty clear - not sure why soccer should be a carve out. If you won't want your athlete to wear a mask, go play in a state that doesn't require one.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/face-coverings.html

Do I have to wear a mask while exercising?
Masks are required when exercising indoors at a gym or fitness center. Masks are also required outdoors when exercising, when it is difficult to maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance between you and others.

OMG, it really isn't that hard. Under the re-opening guidelines, click on "Sports (Youth and Adult)". Link below. Then you will see the text. Everything about your post about it being "clear" is wrong. And you said go play in a "state" that doesn't require one. MD does not and that's not even the debate. And now, MoCo does not for vigorous activities. I will give you that MoCo has not been clear about updating guidance in the other more general areas, but they have changed it for youth sports.

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/reopening/requirements/sports.html

All sports participants, regardless of age, must comply with the face covering requirement and social distancing and hygiene requirements. The County follows the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations regarding the use of face coverings during vigorous activities.

Then there is also this from the MD Soccerplex, the largest complex in the county that is in constant contact and communication with county officials, which unless you think they are blatantly lying and misrepresenting guidance, is abundantly clear:

Update 9/16:

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY: Mask are no longer required during “vigorous and strenuous” activities including games. Montgomery County is currently drafting the new language to be published shortly. However we have been provided explicit permission to proceed without masks during games. Per the Director of Montgomery County Office of Emergency Management & Homeland Security,

“We [Montgomery County] are adopting the American Association of Pediatrics interpretation around face coverings which allow them not to be worn during vigorous and strenuous activity. Their interpretation is detailed here: https://www.aappublications.org/news/2020/07/22/sportsguidance072220”

[Anonymous]

There are more and more 'breathable' masks now... but doesn't it seem like the more breathable a mask is, the less effective it will be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The rules for reopening/operating in MontCo are pretty clear - not sure why soccer should be a carve out. If you won't want your athlete to wear a mask, go play in a state that doesn't require one.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/face-coverings.html

Do I have to wear a mask while exercising?
Masks are required when exercising indoors at a gym or fitness center. Masks are also required outdoors when exercising, when it is difficult to maintain at least 6 feet of physical distance between you and others.

go somewhere else, you seem to be out of your league in this discussion.

"out of my league" because my kid is not such a wimp that he/she cannot exercise in a mask. we are all good - masks and all. hope teams that refuse to wear them are required to forfeit.

no, out of your league because you seem to be way behind on the actual rules and regulations in this state. (and Moco was the outlier- it was one single county, not the state!)I see someone else already replied to you....so no need for me to re-iterate it.