I’ve been bombarded with DMs, comments, articles arguing for a back to normal for kids that ditches all masks for kids + insists covid isn’t bad for them.
The main tactic is the same old using stats + missing the big picture to ultimately argue covid isn’t dangerous for kids
The reality of covid risk to kids is much messier. It involves understanding the complexities of mortality rates, how all children deserve to live a life free of vaccine-preventable disease, how the known + unknown long term effects scare pediatricians more than acute disease
And more than anything it means coming to terms with how transmission itself harms our children, propagating variants that will cause more physical harm to kids, and most importantly prolonging a pandemic that has already caused them so much pain.
After this, we may still decide to take risks w kids + covid exposure. We even come to similar conclusions re: distancing, masks, socializing as those who minimize covid. We see benefits outweighing risks, + we have to accept them. It’s parenting, it’s what we do every day.
So why is the no-mask, covid minimizing so infuriating? It’s dishonest, it’s solace wrapped in guilt, it’s based on a needed cry for balance that comes instead as a message steeped in half truths and incomplete risk assessments.
And it’s also an abdication of responsibility.
Kids shouldn’t be in this position. Our society did not lockdown efficiently, we turned masks during surges of a plague into political debates, and then, when a miracle vaccine was given to us in record time we looked that gift horse in the mouth as well.
There have been ample opportunities- and still are-for adults to step up and end this. Even now with variants, exactly like we predicted, when we are in an arms’ race between vaccines + mutations, adults still won’t step up + get vaccinated to protect kids with herd immunity.
So, while it’s true that acute covid may have a low enough risk profile for kids to warrant changing precautions, they should never even be in this position of choosing between getting covid and living life. And I repeat, acute illness is just one part of the risk assessment.
I wish pundits would be honest. I wish they would stop minimizing covid’s impact on kids and instead maximize accountability about our failure to protect them from it.
I wish we could take some energy spent decrying masks and put it into the actions that protect children.
Angry that kids are wearing masks while adults aren’t? Me too. Get vaccinated and urge others to do so. Wear masks indoors and think critically about what activities you absolutely need, or if you can make any reasonable accommodations to protect unvaccinated kids.
Look at the policies and priorities that led us to this point, a much more challenging task than just blaming it all on the masks.
And please be honest. Acknowledge that we have put parents and kids in a horrible situation, and continue to refuse to step up for them.
In that context, I can talk about the reality of what we need to do regarding precautions in this unnecessary reality we are in. I can have nuanced conversations about risk and benefit, understanding how acceptable risk differs from everyone.
We parents can absolutely make the best decisions for our families, even if the choices are unfair, even if the options are riskier than kids deserve.
We just need the truth. It can be hard to put a mirror up to ours society, but how else can we be better for our children?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
While the real biostatisticians get back to me here’s a #tweetorial on why it’s super important to be careful in how doctors, people, anyone interprets #covid test or antibody results. Hope it helps in the hospitals 🏥, doctors offices, ppl deciding if testing makes sense
I declined antibody testing until I was able to enroll in a study where my results would be useful and checked longitudinally. Convinced my husband to decline too. We started with a quick review of sensitivity and specificity which he understood from college/news
Working w this basic understanding I used the example of a pregnancy test that is 99 percent accurate- aka has a specificity of 99 percent. That means that if you took 100 not pregnant women, 99 would have a negative test and one a false positive, right?