10 Comments
User's avatar
Dan's avatar

Gotta have a control cohort within same school if you want to do actual science.

Expand full comment
coords1306's avatar

What if I want to do just enough science to confirm my assumptions and then attack all those that disagree. j/k. But seems to be the spirit of the day.

Expand full comment
coords1306's avatar

Said this on the Tweet from Rob Hughes but given how fickle Twitter can be a times figured I"d post here too..as I'd like to hear more form all sides on this.

First I'm seeing any data like this as have been content to listen to whatever the experts decides. Thanks for sharing. Are there studies like this that would include the newer variants?

Well I did see a graph of Florida districts a day ago on facebook...so I don't have a link, where the unmasked school had 8% of its students out for testing positive versus 4% for a masked school. I get that that data can't conclusively say masks help but think its worth noting.

Expand full comment
Heather's avatar

My kids are in Cherokee County Georgia schools. We are mask optional. We only had about 2% out. All of our data is published online if you would like to compare to FL. We had 758 cases at the height. 41k students. Teachers are not masked unless they wish. About 50% vaccinated. School is normal this year. No mandatory quarantine for close contacts.

Expand full comment
coords1306's avatar

Thanks for sharing. The headlines about school boards turning into mobs and crazy anti-mask policies gives the impression that the sky is falling or is about to. And then where's the follow up? Did he sky fall? I was for masks...they make sense to me, my kids don't have a problem with them. But more and more I'm skeptical kids under the age of 12 transmit. The 4% vs 8% statistic is a perfect one because for pro-mask folks its confirmation they are right. But IDK...at 4%....for a optional mask atmosphere? For people who are anti-mask...that may be a number they are ok with. To get the full picture need to know the stats on the outcomes for the infections.

All we can do is try our best, but keep paying attention and then reassess.

Expand full comment
Heather's avatar

You’re welcome. I was glad to have the option. I think the school board did a good job of managing the parents wishes. I don’t know about the outcomes this year. But last year only a couple cases were of real concern. But all survived.

We had some rowdy meetings but this year it was anti-healthy quarantines & DEI. The board got rid of the healthy quarantines because 22k were quarantined & only 170 infections came out of it. A lot more negative outcomes with learning/emotional etc. The school board is listening & looking at data. Most of the families I know whose kids got Covid got it from the parents. Our children did last Dec. Not scientific, obviously - but that should be part of a study too.

Getting through the delta wave was a challenge for staffing - every admin employee was subbing at least 3 days a week. They were determined to stay open in person.

Expand full comment
Matthew's avatar

The Arizona study also had a short time period - 1.5 months.

Expand full comment
Strategery's avatar

It's quite concerning how many 'scientists' quote this laughably bad CDC 'study' approvingly with zero attention to the gaping holes in it.

Expand full comment
Jason's avatar

As you rightly point out, the raw number of cases is not known - know only 2 or more - but perhaps equally importantly, there is no consideration of *case rate*. The student populations in these schools vary widely. 2 cases in a 100-person school is far different than 2 cases in a 1,000-person school, yet both are categorized identically.

Expand full comment
Jason's avatar

To wit, 66% of no-mask schools are >1200 students, including 33% >1650. Meanwhile, 67% of early-mask schools are <1200 students, including 52% <850. There is nowhere near sufficient transparency in this paper to trust the analysis.

Expand full comment