The Progressive Case For Mask-Free Kids And Schools

WARNING:  You may wanna sit down when reading this, as this article will slaughter so many sacred cows that it will lead to the mother of all barbecues!

It's September 2021, back to school time for millions of children and teens, and if your thought we would not still be having this inane and insane masks for kids debate 18 months after the start of the pandemic, you would unfortunately be very wrong indeed.  The debate is greater than ever before, and largely split along party lines (Republicans against forced masking, Democrats in favor) because reasons.  I mean, you KNOW things are bad when Ron and Rand Paul end up sounding like the voice of reason!

The progressive left is VERY foolish to cede the moral high ground to the right on this issue.  And it WILL come back to bite them, perhaps as soon as the 2022 midterms.  Just like it always does eventually.  

There are of course some genuine progressive voices desperately shouting into the wilderness to "Unmask Our Kids" yesterday, but they keep on getting silenced and censored by the thought police.  A prime example is this excellent article (preserved in archive on the Wayback Machine) in Forbes online magazine by a progressive teacher (and founder of Zigazoo) named Zak Ringlestein.  He notes how traumatic and toxic it is to children's mental health to subject them to prolonged forced masking, antisocial distancing, and the whole New Abnormal agenda in general.  And he also notes how utterly classist it is in its effects towards poorer children, if not its intent.  The cowards over at Forbes abruptly took the article down, of course, because well, you already know why.

As we have noted before in previous articles, there is absolutely NO scientific reason to support forcing anyone to wear face masks in general, and that applies a fortiori for children.  Not as PPE, not as source control, not as anything at all beyond mere symbolic window dressing and placebos, since we know now that the COVID virus is truly airborne just like cold and flu viruses.  Not only have mask mandates (in schools or in the community) not done a LICK of good in stopping the virus or even making a noticeable dent in the epidemic curves for anyone in the real world, but for children (who are at less risk from COVID than they are from the flu, and are statistically unlikely to be COVID superspreaders either), masks are likely to be more harmful to their physical and mental health and social development when used regularly for prolonged periods of time.

You really want to reduce airborne virus transmission in schools?  Ventilate, ventilate, ventilate!  If you lack high-tech air system upgrades, don't wait, just open the damn windows and doors.  Problem solved.  Next.

"But we can't do that!  What if there might be an active shooter at some undefined point in the future?" Well, unless all windows and doors are literally bulletproof, which they usually are not, keeping them closed 24/7 is really just security theater.  Kinda like how masks are really just public health theater.  And neither one sees the forest for the trees.

Friendly reminder to adults who are still scared:  N95 or greater masks are currently abundantly available for self-protection, and are at least somewhat effective in that regard if fit-tested and used properly.  And any adults who still feel the need to use them as an extra layer of protection when around children are perfectly free to do so.  Voluntarily.

Clearly, all of these mandates fail the Martian test:  that is, could you explain it to a Martian without sounding like an idiot? (You can't.)  And they also fail the 2030 test:  that is, would you still be willing to follow these mandates in 2030, since the virus is endemic and will almost certainly still be around in 2030, 2040, 2050, and beyond?  And given the long-term health, developmental and economic consequences already baked into the cake from the past 18 months of restrictions, all of these mandates also fail the Iroquois seven generations test as well.

There is nothing at all even remotely leftist or progressive about forcing masks on anyone, especially children.  Unless by "leftist" you really mean totalitarian, and by "progressive" you really mean technocratic, of course.  Nor is it even particularly communitarian either, given how utterly corrosive it is to genuine community, unless of course by "communitarian" you really mean communist or antisocial. And it is certainly not in any sense utopian, unless by "utopian" you really mean, well, dystopian.

There is nothing green either about producing billions or trillions of disposable "paper" (actually, polypropylene plastic) masks only to see a good chunk of them end up in the Earth's oceans.  Unless by "green" you really mean greenwashing and ecocidal.

And contrary to a very poorly written article in Ms. Magazine of all places a year ago, there is certainly nothing at all feminist about forcing anyone to cover their faces.  Unless by "feminist" you really mean "inadvertently emulating certain countries and groups that one claims to dislike, to one degree or another", and not seeing the irony of it all.

And finally, take a look at the rest of the world.  The USA is one of a very few countries that forces masks on children under the age of 12, let alone as young as two!  And many of those few other countries that did at some point have now since relented (and hopefully repented!), making the USA a rather lonely country in that regard.  But in one way that is sadly not a surprise, given the great American pastime of scapegoating children and teens for adult problems.  And yes, that even includes Florida at the local school district level, with "rebel without a clue" teachers and administrators openly defying their governor, Ron DeSantis, who is doing his very best to put an end to this complete and utter madness once and for all.

Make no mistake, at this point, no one can intellectually honestly say that these mandates are really about science.  They are all about power and control above all else.  And worse, they are ultimately a convenient segway into COVID vaccine mandates for kids as well.  And that, ladies and gentlemen, is truly scary indeed, given how woefully undertested these experimental gene therapy "vaccines" really are, particularly for children.  If there was ever a hill to die on, this absolutely has to be the one!

UPDATE:  When the pro-mask crowd inevitably trots out this slanted review of their favorite cherry-picked studies, be sure to point out that those studies are either 1) modeling studies and not real-world studies, 2) look only at adults and say literally nothing at all about children or schools, 3) have very weak effect sizes and/or low-quality, 4) have not been consistently replicated, 5) conflict with literally decades of research evidence to the contrary, 6) short-term studies that found short-term effects that did not really pan out in the real world in the long run, 7) do not address the potential long-term harms of prolonged forced masking, or 8) all of the above. 

Take a look instead at this excellent article that sums up the latest actual science on the matter of masks for kids.  Spoiler alert:  it does NOT make the pro-mask side look like winners at all, to put it mildly. 

As for the latest cherry-picking CDC "study" of the effects of mask mandates in schools, well, let's just say that if you torture the data enough, they will confess to anything.  There are so many confounding variables not controlled for, not least of which are contact tracing (or lack thereof) and virus testing rates, since according to the CDC's own rules, if both people were wearing masks at the time, that is not considered an "exposure" and thus not automatically tested.  Yes, really.  And more tests generally means more "cases", particularly if there are no symptoms.  

This is what passes for "The Science" these days.

Also see here as well.  And lest you still think masks somehow work for and eradicated the common flu (!), see here as well.  We really got a nice bridge we'd like to sell you.

FEBRUARY 2022 UPDATE:  Seriously, this needs to end, and yesterday is not soon enough!  To any teachers and staff reading this who are still worried, there are indeed some very cheap and low-tech ways to fight airborne viruses in classrooms that do NOT depend on masks or antisocial distancing.  Build a DIY Corsi-Rosenthal box air purifier, open the windows/doors for fresh air, and relax and take a chill pill already!  (And UV air disinfection also works well too, which has been known for over 80 years now.)

Oh, and now we see that the actual data from the updated version of the widely-acclaimed Bangladesh mask study shows that masks simply don't work at all in the real world, period.  That, plus the Danish mask study, plus the past 100+ years of research are enough to conclude that any perceived benefits were basically spurious all along.  We already knew they didn't work in 1918, and they sure as hell don't work now.

The Progressive Case For Reopening American Schools Sooner Than Later

NOTE:  This article is about K-12 schools only.  For the college question, please see this here.

Politics in the USA in 2020 has apparently gone from absurd to utterly horrifying to just plain silly.  The latest political football is whether America's schools should reopen in the fall, having been closed in all 50 states and territories since mid to late March.  Democrats are generally against it, while Republicans and especially Trump and his supporters are in favor of it.  Even Betsy DeVos, who has never been a friend of public education, suddenly pretends to support it (while surreptitiously trying to gut and ultimately privatize it, of course), while Democrats who are usually the the biggest champions of public education are more likely to oppose reopening.  Thus it seems to split rather evenly along party lines, as often happens in today's fraught and bizarre political climate.

But when you peel back the politics and see the issue for what it really is, then the only truly progressive position at this juncture is to reopen schools.  Because keeping them closed does more harm than good on balance, to both children and society at large.  And strictly and seriously "following the science" would in fact point strongly in favor of reopening schools.

School closures are a classic example of throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.  While school closures are known to work very well in the short term in slowing the spread of influenza and infectious diseases in general, the longer-term effects are unknown, and children (and teens) seem to be at relatively low risk from this virus as well as not a particularly significant vector for spreading it to adults.  While some evidence strongly suggests that temporary school closures early in the epidemic curve have helped to flatten that curve (even if only indirectly to reduce the number of adults infecting each other), it remains unclear how long such benefits can last (likely not very long).  Many countries like Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Germany, and Taiwan (all fairly progressive countries) have already reopened schools with no evidence of any resurgence of the disease that could possibly be related to the reopenings, and Sweden never closed them at all for children under 16.  Belarus even kept colleges and universities open too, and yet they still have one the mildest outbreaks in the world.

Meanwhile, the collateral consequences of keeping schools closed keep on increasing the longer schools remain closed.  Virtual learning will never be as good as in-person instruction.  Students fall behind and find it harder and harder to catch up, and socioeconomic inequalities and inequities are widened that much more.  Children are denied the socialization experiences that are needed for healthy development.  And it also creates a heavy burden on parents, particularly working mothers, making work-life balance all but impossible.  There is clearly nothing "woke" or progressive denying such realities.

And the CDC guidance for reopening schools isn't really that much better than keeping them closed.  As famous Libertarian and Republican Senator Ron Paul himself noted back in May:

Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) did its part to encourage homeschooling when it unveiled “guidelines” for schools to follow when they reopen. Among the CDC’s guidelines are that schools put tape on the hallways, directing children which direction to walk and how much distance to keep between themselves and their classmates. The CDC also recommends children do not share electronic devices or learning aids. The guidelines even say children should wear masks at school.The CDC’s guidelines instruct schools to close playgrounds and cafeterias, and to cancel all field trips and assemblies. Instead, students are to spend all day at their desks, not even leaving classrooms for lunch or recess.The CDC’s guidelines may not have the force of law, but it is likely most government schools will adopt them in order to ensure continued access to federal funding. Schools will do this even though children are at a very low risk of being seriously harmed by coronavirus. In fact, by forbidding children from going outside to play, exercise, and get sunshine, the guidelines actually endanger children’s health. The guidelines also harm children by limiting their ability to interact with their fellow students and develop social skills.

Now you KNOW things are bad in this country when Ron Paul (and/or his son Rand Paul) is anywhere even close to sounding like the voice of reason!  Keep in mind that in most of the countries that already reopened schools (or never closed them), none of these rigid and utterly dystopian protocols were employed in their schools, or at least not for very long.  Generally, the only notable departure from the status quo ante was a greater focus on hygiene, and that was basically it.  And the sky did not fall.

(The creators of South Park would surely have a field day with that!  Per Poe's Law, the satire writes itself.)

Yes, some precautions are certainly needed, particularly in schools that are located in communities where the virus is still spreading.  But we don't need to keep schools closed indefinitely or go full dystopia either.  The best advice the TSAP can recommend is that decisions be made as locally as possible, with all schools in this country planning on fully reopening by September 8 at the latest, and playing it by ear from then.  If there is a known outbreak (of three or more individuals) on school grounds/vehicles or otherwise linked to the school, a severe outbreak in the local community (i.e. a virus test positivity rate exceeding 10% for a 7 day rolling average) and/or excessive absenteeism for any reason, a brief precautionary closure not to exceed two consecutive weeks ought to be done without delay for that particular school or district only.  For excessive absenteeism specifically, the brief closures may be further extended as necessary for the duration of the bulk of the absences, kinda like was done locally with the 2009, 1968, and 1957 flu pandemics in some schools. But otherwise, schools should plan on being fully open by default.

Additionally, even after fully reopening for in-person classes, distance learning should also still remain as an option on the menu for any students with high-risk household members (or with serious underlying health conditions themselves), as well as for any teachers who believe themselves or their household members to be at high risk.  That way, even if the odd outbreak does happen to occur at school, it would really be a non-problem practically speaking.

As for masks and social distancing, and other restrictive protocols, that should be decided locally as well, and in our opinion only implemented as an alternative to closure when there is locally widespread community transmission but not (yet) seen among students, teachers, or staff.  Otherwise, a greater focus on hygiene, disinfection, and ventilation should be the only significant departure from the old normal, and perhaps also reasonably limit class sizes and the size of large assemblies.  And perhaps fever checks at the door as well.  That is, use common sense.

And parents/guardians, for the love of all that is good, please keep your kids home if they have any questionable symptoms, or if anyone else in the same household is under isolation or quarantine for known or suspected COVID-19 or any other contagion.  Honestly, that is just basic Public Health 101.

And yes, public schools should receive more funding going forward, and teachers should be paid more.  And if it is done by our Monetarily Sovereign federal government as as opposed to (our often already overtaxing and borderline bankrupt) state and local governments, it won't cost the taxpayers anything.

So what are we waiting for?

UPDATE:  It looks like a few states have already reopened schools with in-person classes as of early August, such as Indiana and even (gasp!) Georgia.  And apparently parts of Montana already did back in May, as did parts of Canada.  And by now, practically all of Europe too.  All with no evidence of any "parade of horribles" resulting from their decisions to do so.

OCTOBER UPDATE:  Many (though still not all) American schools have reopened, and it looks like it really was not a disaster after all.  Well fewer than 1% of both students and teachers have had confirmed or even suspected cases since the current school year began.  In fact, a recent analysis in 191 countries worldwide found no link between school reopenings and coronavirus infection rates.  But hey, we (and Sweden) could have told you that months ago, and in fact we literally did.  Now if only the remaining schools would finally open as well, yesterday.

Even The Atlantic now admits that the fears about schools reopening were grossly overblown.  Even in (gasp!) Georgia.  And the esteemed British Medical Journal (BMJ) now believes that closing schools had backfired and actually led to a net increase in COVID deaths compared to keeping them open.

NOVEMBER UPDATE:  A new study finds that closing schools likely costs children more life years than it saves in the long run.  That is, on balance, doing so actually kills more children than it saves.