Reply to When can we lose masks in elementary school?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "When can we lose masks in elementary school?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]DCPS needs to continue to mandate mask wearing for kids in school and also whenever adults are on school property. Let’s see how things look six months after the start of school before considering stopping.

People can be asymptomatic and spread Covid and the new variant. Some people might lie about being vaccinated. Some adults do activities with others that might be reckless or questionable or are around spreaders. Some are risk takers or sensation seekers.  Some selfish.

Wearing masks shows we care and are determined to beat the disease. It’s only a little longer. D.C. is a transient city so you never know what to expect.[/quote]

What are the long term consequences of increased carbon dioxide on a developing brain? 
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2781743[/quote]

You keep posting this.  This is a terribly done study and has been explained to you in prior threads. [/quote]

Read the comments on the journal website. This was terribly done and should not have been published in jama pediatrics.

July 2, 2021
Our Children Deserve Better Science

Eve Bloomgarden, MD | Northwestern University Chicago IL; Co-founder and COO of IMPACT (www.impact4hc.com)
Authors: 
Eve Bloomgarden,MD (Northwestern University, Co-founder IMPACT4hc), Elisabeth Marnik PhD (Husson University, author of Science Whiz Liz), 
Alison Bernstein PhD (Michigan State University, Co-founder SciMoms and MommyPhD), Rebecca J. Heick, PhD (Augustana College, Author of Your Friendly Neighborhood Epidemiologist)

JAMA is a well respected peer reviewed journal. This research letter has extensive flaws and repercussions that may lead to very real harm for children. It is disappointing to see that this research letter was published in this journal.

First, this is written by individuals with known bias against masks and other non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID, as well as vaccinations. The lead author is a psychologist with no training pertaining to this area of research.

Second, there are extensive methodological issues. They used a G100 CO2 incubator analyzer, which is made for measuring CO2 levels in incubators. There is no data supporting the use of G100 as a valid and accurate instrument for the type of measurement used in this study. They also did not address the amount of dead space within the mask that could be further making their measurements inconsistent or unreliable. It is also unclear how they could reliably distinguish between inhaled and exhaled air using the described methods.

Third, their results presented are incomplete and difficult to interpret as many previous commenters have noted. Their trial protocol included in supplement 2 outlines that they would also collect blood oxygenation, heart rate and breathing frequency. Yet none of this data was included in this letter. Their results also show almost the same CO2 readings for both surgical masks and respirator FFP2 masks. If their findings were accurate you would expect a difference, given the differing filter capabilities. It is also unclear why their measurement of CO2 in baseline inhaled air is different than in ambient air.

Fourth, there was also no discussion regarding whether these results are clinically meaningful. They’re using flawed measurements obtained with a device that was not designed for this purpose and stating that this demonstrates harm. There were no actual health metrics reported, like pO2 or pCO2 and no discussion of the actual data needed to confirm clinical significance. These would be more reliable indicators of potential harmful effects on children.

Overall, this paper misinterprets inappropriately collected data leading to incorrect, distorted, and dangerous conclusions.

Lastly, we have real life evidence from millions of children who have been successfully wearing masks every day for months. We have extensive evidence that masking is an essential protective strategy to slow and prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. If this study were accurate and reflective of the real world we would see adverse health events reported worldwide. We do not. We also have data from other peer reviewed papers that has shown no harmful effects. This is a study searching for a mechanism for a non-existent problem. The subject of this letter, regardless of conclusion, should have prompted intense scientific scrutiny prior to publication. The bell cannot be unrung, as this research letter is already being used as “scientific proof” that masks are harming our children, but a retraction should be strongly considered.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics