Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

YOU. CAN. WEAR. A. MASK.

Hell, you can wear 6 masks.

Hell, get vaccinated and wear 6 masks. You'll be fine. Your kid will be fine. Time to take your health into your own hands.

Again, an antimasker showing complete ignorance about how masks work. Masks protect others and the wearer from spread. Thus, an unmasked child puts other students at risk even if masked.

That's the way of the world now. It's going to be masks-optional virtually everywhere. Deal with it or stay home.

I understand you a holes got the change you want. Your win does not mean that the benefits of masking isn’t true.

+1 I totally understand and support what you're saying, PP. Unfortunately the ignorant are willful and deliberately choosing to stay ignorant. Our only hope, as supporters of masks, is to hang on and to do what we know is right. Our family isn't going to cave to peer pressure and we will continue to mask.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

Well said and we agree. ACPS is hanging us out to dry.

Good news for you, and all the forever maskers "following the science". As of today, Alexandria is low! No masks required nor recommended anywhere, including in schools.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/community-levels.html

Looks like you'll have to take it up with the CDC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

Well said and we agree. ACPS is hanging us out to dry.

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

YOU. CAN. WEAR. A. MASK.

Hell, you can wear 6 masks.

Hell, get vaccinated and wear 6 masks. You'll be fine. Your kid will be fine. Time to take your health into your own hands.

Again, an antimasker showing complete ignorance about how masks work. Masks protect others and the wearer from spread. Thus, an unmasked child puts other students at risk even if masked.

That's the way of the world now. It's going to be masks-optional virtually everywhere. Deal with it or stay home.

I understand you a holes got the change you want. Your win does not mean that the benefits of masking isn’t true.

Anonymous wrote:I still think it is an open question how much control the state legislature or state executive has over a local school board because the state constitution does vest supervision of schools to the school board. This is an issue that goes way beyond masks.

Yes, there are no RCT studies showing that universal masking works and not any good studies with proper controls to show it works to reduce transmission in schools. That said, studies do show that KN95/KF94 masks that are not worn with a super tight seal still work well for the wearer. Not as well as when they are fit-tested with a pressed-to-the-face seal, but so long as such a mask is flush against the face to avoid gaps, they do provide a good deal more protection than a surgical or cloth face mask. It is disingenuous to argue that a KN95/KF94 masks will not protect unless it is worn so tightly that it compresses and bruises the skin. High-quality masks absolutely protect students at risk of severe illness or those who have a family member at risk. Let's try to be empathetic to that need and let's hope that the school district continues to provide students who want and need high-quality masks with a supply of them.

From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

YOU. CAN. WEAR. A. MASK.

Hell, you can wear 6 masks.

Hell, get vaccinated and wear 6 masks. You'll be fine. Your kid will be fine. Time to take your health into your own hands.

Again, an antimasker showing complete ignorance about how masks work. Masks protect others and the wearer from spread. Thus, an unmasked child puts other students at risk even if masked.

That's the way of the world now. It's going to be masks-optional virtually everywhere. Deal with it or stay home.

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

YOU. CAN. WEAR. A. MASK.

Hell, you can wear 6 masks.

Hell, get vaccinated and wear 6 masks. You'll be fine. Your kid will be fine. Time to take your health into your own hands.

Again, an antimasker showing complete ignorance about how masks work. Masks protect others and the wearer from spread. Thus, an unmasked child puts other students at risk even if masked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.

YOU. CAN. WEAR. A. MASK.

Hell, you can wear 6 masks.

Hell, get vaccinated and wear 6 masks. You'll be fine. Your kid will be fine. Time to take your health into your own hands.

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 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.

This was such beautiful good faith reasoning. Well done.

What a bunch of hooey. ACPS distributes free surgical-grade masks and KN95s to every student and staff member. My kid has scads of them. They were handed out in advisory and then he gets more any time he goes to the office to ask for more. He says no one is wearing cloth masks at school.

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article on yesterday’s Board meeting, it sounds like the antimaskers have won completely. ACPS does not sound like it will do anything to protect maskers from the antimaskers. At least the numbers do seem to be still heading in the right direction so maybe there will be minimal spread that could have been reasonably avoided.