Judith Danovitch's researches how preschool & elementary school kids evaluate & think about information. In this article, she evaluates claims of "mask harms" and the impiactions, for cognitive development, of not seeing mouths, smiles & frowns.🧵 nytimes.com/2021/08/18/opi…
Daovitch admits that, though there is little data on masks per se, there is evidence from head coverings. “Children in cultures where caregivers & educators wear head coverings that obscure their mouths & noses develop skills just as children in other cultures do.”
What’s more, she adds, blind people still learn to speak, read and socialize.
Danovitch points out that “looking at eyes is at least as important as looking at mouths" given that by age 2, typical kids spend 2x as much time on eyes than on mouths.
In fact, Danovitch points out, children who infer thoughts and emotions based on eyes alone, exhibit greater emotional intelligence.
All this should really make us wonder why the anti-maskers aren’t at least as concerned, if not more concerned, with sunglasses and hairstyles that hide the eyes, than they are with masks. But I digress.
Masks, Danovitch says, also are opportunities to develop skills that rely on “ prosody, gesture & context” as well as “ tone of voice or a teacher’s body language”.
In addition, in keeping a mask on and in place, kids can develop the kind of self-control that helps at “achieving their long-term goals, solving problems and handling stressful situations.”
Danovitch adds that masks are practice at caring for the community and lessons in transmission that give children opportunities to feel good about “sacrifices on behalf of others in need”.
Surprising no one whose been paying attention, how children feel about masks is largely a reflection of how their parents feel about masks.
Which makes one wonder what the "mask harm" parents are saying to their kids and why masks can’t be like other hardships kids inevitably face where we often teach them to turn adversity to advantage.
At the very least Danovitch provides a helpful roadmap for parents interested in redirecting potential mask complaints to other skills to encourage: like those of emotional intelligence and personal growth.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Unhappy with the CDC’s paltry number of myocarditis cases attributable to mRNA vaccines, @TracyBethHoeg et al set out on the vast sea of VAERS in hopes of catching more fish by using "broader search and inclusion criteria" aka a bigger, but definitely not better, net. 🧵
Admirable if only for the nakedness of its ambition, the authors don’t hide that their aim is to “update” the CDC’s estimate,
This study by @TracyBethHoeg, @KrugAlli et al. reinvents the need for the adage "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" as a response to the authors’ novel approach “If you don’t have symptoms, you don’t have cases."🧵 bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjspor…
The study is allegedly about player-to-player transmission being contained by the protocols for youth ice hockey the authors develop. Alarm bells ring almost immediately when the authors introduce us to the study’s crew: a “volunteer epidemiologist”,
Covid minimizers, like @drlucymcbride, are like eclipses that cover astronomical objects. The disaster behind their obfuscations is still there despite the cover of misleading and often irrelevant “good cheer” they try to throw in front of it. 🧵 theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
Implying the well-off and protected have nothing to fear because hospitals are only filling up “in states with where low vaccination rates” may reassure the privileged McBride seems most concerned with.
While @ProfEmilyOster denies consulting with @GovRonDesantis, she hasn’t yet repudiated her study. She should. The study claims to show mitigations don't work but has so many design flaws, even effective measures would fail her trials. Very long🧵. nytimes.com/2021/06/22/us/…
Probably because they’re assumed to be the “gold standard”, Oster’s studies employ the all the signs of being Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) in which mitigations: mask mandates, in-person density and ventilation are compared with schools absent those same mitigations.
Oster’s conclusion is, more or less, that mitigations make no difference to Covid case counts in students, staff and teachers associated with schools.
They won't stop will they? Despite the evidence that cases in kids rise even when adults are well vaccinated (see the UK), the fact is an adult vaccinated today is weeks away from providing indirect protection. They have no interim plan except widespread infection of kids.
No, @TracyBethHoeg, the article you point to does not claim delta is not "resulting in increased rates of in-school transmission”. In fact, it says the opposite. 🧵
Speaking of the 12 presumed cases of in-school transmission for the summer, the article offers this: "By way of comparison, the district reported 2 cases of apparant transmission during the regular school year." latimes.com/california/sto…
In fact, the article very explicitly implicates Delta in the rise of infections.