Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

This take is bad and you should feel bad. If you spent less time claiming people you disagree with are "screeching" and more time actually reading what they wrote, you would see that the PP wrote that cloth masks don't work (which the RCT showed), and the current variants are so transmissible that, effectively, only a continuous airtight seal around the mouth and nose with a KN95 or N95 will stop transmission. That means no cloth masks, period. That means cranking it on so tight that you look like a nurse stepping out of the OR when it comes off. That means never taking it off to scratch your nose. That means never yawning real big and thus breaking the seal but failing to readjust it afterwards to reestablish the seal. And instilling that level of consistency and discipline all the way down to five year olds. For six to seven hours a day.

If you think that's necessary, make that case. But it's obvious that half-hearted cloth masking has no significant effects on transmission in school environments.

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

The entire country of Britain never masked kids under 12 and only opened vaccination to that group on 1/30/2022.

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

Yikes

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

This just makes me so sad. As a mom to a kid with significant speech difficulties, who is really struggling to understand and be understood, the fact that parents out there feel this way are heartbroken. Please don't assume that all kids that unmask have anti-vaxxer, anti-mask parents. My kid is vaccinated, and already had covid, so really isn't a danger to your child. Your attitude and heartlessness towards my kid is terrifying.

You need to advocate for your child and we need to advocate for ours. Your child, if indeed he does have an IEP and a legitimate disability, is the 0.001%. That you cannot see that is ... alarming. I will not endanger my children because of a child like yours whose needs can easily be met in a self-contained classroom. The 0.001% doesn't get to drive what happens to the rest of us.

Yep, my child has an IEP. Yep, I've tried to advocate for this repeatedly. And, ACPS has repeatedly denied my request. All speech therapy needs to happen with both parties masked, no exceptions. And just because a child has an IEP does not mean they belong in a self-contained classroom. In fact, it's actively discouraged, it's called inclusion. Look it up.

ACPS should provide virtual speech therapy so both the teacher and student can be unmasked as an accommodation.

You might be trying to be helpful, but kids don't only speak and need to be understood during speech therapy sessions. They actually need to communicate and be understood all of the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

This just makes me so sad. As a mom to a kid with significant speech difficulties, who is really struggling to understand and be understood, the fact that parents out there feel this way are heartbroken. Please don't assume that all kids that unmask have anti-vaxxer, anti-mask parents. My kid is vaccinated, and already had covid, so really isn't a danger to your child. Your attitude and heartlessness towards my kid is terrifying.

You need to advocate for your child and we need to advocate for ours. Your child, if indeed he does have an IEP and a legitimate disability, is the 0.001%. That you cannot see that is ... alarming. I will not endanger my children because of a child like yours whose needs can easily be met in a self-contained classroom. The 0.001% doesn't get to drive what happens to the rest of us.

Yep, my child has an IEP. Yep, I've tried to advocate for this repeatedly. And, ACPS has repeatedly denied my request. All speech therapy needs to happen with both parties masked, no exceptions. And just because a child has an IEP does not mean they belong in a self-contained classroom. In fact, it's actively discouraged, it's called inclusion. Look it up.

ACPS should provide virtual speech therapy so both the teacher and student can be unmasked as an accommodation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

This just makes me so sad. As a mom to a kid with significant speech difficulties, who is really struggling to understand and be understood, the fact that parents out there feel this way are heartbroken. Please don't assume that all kids that unmask have anti-vaxxer, anti-mask parents. My kid is vaccinated, and already had covid, so really isn't a danger to your child. Your attitude and heartlessness towards my kid is terrifying.

You need to advocate for your child and we need to advocate for ours. Your child, if indeed he does have an IEP and a legitimate disability, is the 0.001%. That you cannot see that is ... alarming. I will not endanger my children because of a child like yours whose needs can easily be met in a self-contained classroom. The 0.001% doesn't get to drive what happens to the rest of us.

Yep, my child has an IEP. Yep, I've tried to advocate for this repeatedly. And, ACPS has repeatedly denied my request. All speech therapy needs to happen with both parties masked, no exceptions. And just because a child has an IEP does not mean they belong in a self-contained classroom. In fact, it's actively discouraged, it's called inclusion. Look it up.

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

x1000 We also would support this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

This just makes me so sad. As a mom to a kid with significant speech difficulties, who is really struggling to understand and be understood, the fact that parents out there feel this way are heartbroken. Please don't assume that all kids that unmask have anti-vaxxer, anti-mask parents. My kid is vaccinated, and already had covid, so really isn't a danger to your child. Your attitude and heartlessness towards my kid is terrifying.

You need to advocate for your child and we need to advocate for ours. Your child, if indeed he does have an IEP and a legitimate disability, is the 0.001%. That you cannot see that is ... alarming. I will not endanger my children because of a child like yours whose needs can easily be met in a self-contained classroom. The 0.001% doesn't get to drive what happens to the rest of us.

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

This just makes me so sad. As a mom to a kid with significant speech difficulties, who is really struggling to understand and be understood, the fact that parents out there feel this way are heartbroken. Please don't assume that all kids that unmask have anti-vaxxer, anti-mask parents. My kid is vaccinated, and already had covid, so really isn't a danger to your child. Your attitude and heartlessness towards my kid is terrifying.

the amount of fearmongering by the anti maskers is INSANE.

What do you mean "the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools"? It currently IS being maintained in schools, with high levels of acceptance and adherence by students and staff alike. The only people screeching about how masks need to come off are the people who AREN'T in schools. By and large, teachers and staff in Alexandria schools strongly support masking, especially when they don't know if a child has been vaccinated or not (yes, there is a small number who want to unmask but it is a sificantly small number). As parents, we strongly support masking for the same reason. We have absolutely no confidence that the unmaskers have vaccinated their children; after all, if they were more careful and prudent they wouldn't support unmasking in the first place so it stands to reason that they also would be anti-vaxers.

Yesterday I overheard a few people discussing the possibility of a class action suit aimed at the SB if they move forward with following the EO & SB 739. I believe the speakers were also discussion either the same or a different suit (spelling? law is not my area) Youngkin and all the other bleepers who supported the new legislation. We could firmly get behind that.

The SB for Alexandria has a fiduciary responsibility to keep our children safe. Putting children in harms way by purposefully exposing them to unmasked and unvaccinated children certainly seems to go against that responsibility. If unmasked and unvaccinated children are kept in a different room and if they are not near my children, fine. If not, then we will have a big problem. It is not okay to endanger my children because some anti-vaxer and anti-masker is having an anxiety attack about their kid wearing a mask. Preventing unmasked and unvaccinated children being around mine in school would be a law suit we would fully support in word, action and as much money as it takes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am so sick of seeing this stupid RCT study. It is irrelevant to the school masking debate.

-The study found no effects for surgical masking below the age of 50
-The effects it did find, while large in some cases, like over 65, were in other cases so small the authors had to fudge the threshold of statistical significance (p=.05) in order to include them.
-The study found no reduction in infection risk with cloth masks. So unless your position is that schools need to mandate high-quality masks for everyone (good luck with that, btw), you actually do agree with the PP saying cloth masks don't work.
-The study looked at poor, rural villages on the Asian subcontinent, about as far removed from the behavioral and environmental milieu of a US classroom I can imagine.
-The study was pre-delta variant. Delta was 50-200% more transmissible than Alpha. Omicron was 400% more transmissible, possibly more, and the BA2 sub-lineage is 50% more transmissible than that. Each increase in transmissibility reduces the minimum viral exposure necessary to trigger an infection, which increases the level of mask discipline and consistency of the airtight seal necessary for a mask to have a meaningful effect. If you think that threshold can be maintained in a school environment indefinitely, you're crazy.

The difference in transmissibility can't be understated. People citing the RCT are basically saying "I conducted a study in England which shows umbrellas to be effective in keeping people from getting wet in the rain," and then going around Southeast Asia during monsoon season handing out those collapsible umbrellas you can fit in a purse. Of course it won't work. And the person saying in that situation "umbrellas don't work" isn't anti-science.

Lucky for us, "getting wet" in this scenario is a manageable outcome for the vast, vast majority of people, and the sort of thing that, with or without umbrellas, our society can and will have to live with well into the long-term.

Even studies designed to show that masks work using mannequins and ideal conditions tended to show that masks don't work under circumstances like the bolded.

With regard to the bold text, you’re advocating for less masking the more transmissible a variant is? Wouldn’t you encourage better and more prevalent masking if the strain is more transmissible? Make it make sense.

Next you all are going to be suggesting doctors, nurses and patients remove their masks.

PP wasn't arguing for less masking with more transmissible variants, but, rather the level of mask discipline required in those circumstances cannot be maintained in schools. We're only talking about schools here. It all seems a moot point anyway since the school board materials for tomorrow's meeting are published and specifically state:

"Mask wearing is highly recommended during periods of high or substantial transmission in all ACPS buildings and vehicles
• Beginning March 1st, parents may opt their students out of mask wearing, per SB 739"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A large-scale “gold standard” controlled, randomized international study on face masks shows surgical masks *are* effective against COVID. Stop saying masks don’t work, they do.

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-masks-covid-19.html

https://egc.yale.edu/largest-study-masks-and-covid-19-demonstrates-their-effectiveness-real-world

And here’s yet another scientific study that was published last month.

https://www.ucf.edu/news/face-masks-cut-distance-airborne-pathogens-could-travel-in-half-new-study-finds/?amp

I am so sick of seeing this stupid RCT study. It is irrelevant to the school masking debate.

-The study found no effects for surgical masking below the age of 50
-The effects it did find, while large in some cases, like over 65, were in other cases so small the authors had to fudge the threshold of statistical significance (p=.05) in order to include them.
-The study found no reduction in infection risk with cloth masks. So unless your position is that schools need to mandate high-quality masks for everyone (good luck with that, btw), you actually do agree with the PP saying cloth masks don't work.
-The study looked at poor, rural villages on the Asian subcontinent, about as far removed from the behavioral and environmental milieu of a US classroom I can imagine.
-The study was pre-delta variant. Delta was 50-200% more transmissible than Alpha. Omicron was 400% more transmissible, possibly more, and the BA2 sub-lineage is 50% more transmissible than that. Each increase in transmissibility reduces the minimum viral exposure necessary to trigger an infection, which increases the level of mask discipline and consistency of the airtight seal necessary for a mask to have a meaningful effect. If you think that threshold can be maintained in a school environment indefinitely, you're crazy.

The difference in transmissibility can't be understated. People citing the RCT are basically saying "I conducted a study in England which shows umbrellas to be effective in keeping people from getting wet in the rain," and then going around Southeast Asia during monsoon season handing out those collapsible umbrellas you can fit in a purse. Of course it won't work. And the person saying in that situation "umbrellas don't work" isn't anti-science.

Lucky for us, "getting wet" in this scenario is a manageable outcome for the vast, vast majority of people, and the sort of thing that, with or without umbrellas, our society can and will have to live with well into the long-term.

Even studies designed to show that masks work using mannequins and ideal conditions tended to show that masks don't work under circumstances like the bolded.

With regard to the bold text, you’re advocating for less masking the more transmissible a variant is? Wouldn’t you encourage better and more prevalent masking if the strain is more transmissible? Make it make sense.

Next you all are going to be suggesting doctors, nurses and patients remove their masks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A large-scale “gold standard” controlled, randomized international study on face masks shows surgical masks *are* effective against COVID. Stop saying masks don’t work, they do.

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-masks-covid-19.html

https://egc.yale.edu/largest-study-masks-and-covid-19-demonstrates-their-effectiveness-real-world

And here’s yet another scientific study that was published last month.

https://www.ucf.edu/news/face-masks-cut-distance-airborne-pathogens-could-travel-in-half-new-study-finds/?amp

I am so sick of seeing this stupid RCT study. It is irrelevant to the school masking debate.

-The study found no effects for surgical masking below the age of 50
-The effects it did find, while large in some cases, like over 65, were in other cases so small the authors had to fudge the threshold of statistical significance (p=.05) in order to include them.
-The study found no reduction in infection risk with cloth masks. So unless your position is that schools need to mandate high-quality masks for everyone (good luck with that, btw), you actually do agree with the PP saying cloth masks don't work.
-The study looked at poor, rural villages on the Asian subcontinent, about as far removed from the behavioral and environmental milieu of a US classroom I can imagine.
-The study was pre-delta variant. Delta was 50-200% more transmissible than Alpha. Omicron was 400% more transmissible, possibly more, and the BA2 sub-lineage is 50% more transmissible than that. Each increase in transmissibility reduces the minimum viral exposure necessary to trigger an infection, which increases the level of mask discipline and consistency of the airtight seal necessary for a mask to have a meaningful effect. If you think that threshold can be maintained in a school environment indefinitely, you're crazy.

The difference in transmissibility can't be understated. People citing the RCT are basically saying "I conducted a study in England which shows umbrellas to be effective in keeping people from getting wet in the rain," and then going around Southeast Asia during monsoon season handing out those collapsible umbrellas you can fit in a purse. Of course it won't work. And the person saying in that situation "umbrellas don't work" isn't anti-science.

Lucky for us, "getting wet" in this scenario is a manageable outcome for the vast, vast majority of people, and the sort of thing that, with or without umbrellas, our society can and will have to live with well into the long-term.

Even studies designed to show that masks work using mannequins and ideal conditions tended to show that masks don't work under circumstances like the bolded.

Anonymous wrote:A large-scale “gold standard” controlled, randomized international study on face masks shows surgical masks *are* effective against COVID. Stop saying masks don’t work, they do.

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-masks-covid-19.html

https://egc.yale.edu/largest-study-masks-and-covid-19-demonstrates-their-effectiveness-real-world

And here’s yet another scientific study that was published last month.

https://www.ucf.edu/news/face-masks-cut-distance-airborne-pathogens-could-travel-in-half-new-study-finds/?amp

I am so sick of seeing this stupid RCT study. It is irrelevant to the school masking debate.

-The study found no effects for surgical masking below the age of 50
-The effects it did find, while large in some cases, like over 65, were in other cases so small the authors had to fudge the threshold of statistical significance (p=.05) in order to include them.
-The study found no reduction in infection risk with cloth masks. So unless your position is that schools need to mandate high-quality masks for everyone (good luck with that, btw), you actually do agree with the PP saying cloth masks don't work.
-The study looked at poor, rural villages on the Asian subcontinent, about as far removed from the behavioral and environmental milieu of a US classroom I can imagine.
-The study was pre-delta variant. Delta was 50-200% more transmissible than Alpha. Omicron was 400% more transmissible, possibly more, and the BA2 sub-lineage is 50% more transmissible than that. Each increase in transmissibility reduces the minimum viral exposure necessary to trigger an infection, which increases the level of mask discipline and consistency of the airtight seal necessary for a mask to have a meaningful effect. If you think that threshold can be maintained in a school environment indefinitely, you're crazy.

The difference in transmissibility can't be understated. People citing the RCT are basically saying "I conducted a study in England which shows umbrellas to be effective in keeping people from getting wet in the rain," and then going around Southeast Asia during monsoon season handing out those collapsible umbrellas you can fit in a purse. Of course it won't work. And the person saying in that situation "umbrellas don't work" isn't anti-science.

Lucky for us, "getting wet" in this scenario is a manageable outcome for the vast, vast majority of people, and the sort of thing that, with or without umbrellas, our society can and will have to live with well into the long-term.