The World Health Organization recommends a cautious approach to masking kids ages 6-11 and advises against masking 5 and under for any circumstance. Most of the world follows this advice, except our CDC which shamelessly advises masking 2+.
Here are school masking ages in Europe
This work was my own research where policies were publicly reported. Some may have changed. Where U.S. schools often take a one size fits all approach, we are an exception. More countries do not default to masking kids in classroom settings in primary schools.
While the CDC and many local jurisdictions have toddlers and preschool children masking, most of the sane world follows the WHO advice of not masking younger kids and has varying policies of primary school kids ages 6-11.
The media would have you believe the U.S. policy is rule
Florida took the lead at banning mask mandates in schools of any kind. Some other states have attempted to follow. This is painted as the extreme outlier, but we are more of an outlier to the rest of the world in trying a one size fits all approach to every grade level.
One final note about the original graph is that some of these countries have masking policies in primary schools where kids must wear masks in the hallways or on buses, etc., but do not have to wear them all day when sitting in their classrooms.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"We have made huge strides in effectively monitoring this virus," says @CDCDirector Rochelle Walensky.
There you have it. She's planting the seed for science changing. She's now discussing Wastewater surveillance as if that's a new technology. She says they'll ramp it up.
Using wastewater surveillance for monitoring spread is a great idea. They could have and should have been utilizing it a year ago.
So from the sound of this briefing, they aren't making any new changes but Walensky is definitely hinting at laying the groundwork. She says they'll move to the next phase through improved 'surveillance' after spending 5 mins talking about all the great 'new' techniques they have
A tale of two graphs: one is the CDC that shows 68x chances of dying overall for fully unvaccinated in Nov. compared to people with 3+ doses. UKHSA, meanwhile, shows between 3x-11x difference for deaths within 28d of + test for last 4 weeks based on age group.
1/2
CDC disclaimer: an "unvaccinated person" includes anyone that "has not been verified to have received a COVID-19 vaccine."
UKHSA disclaimer, meanwhile, counts only those with a record of vaccination status and includes data from the same source for both numerator and denominator
UK's data is far more reliable because they make this important adjustment.
The idea that omicron is much more mild is no longer in question. The evidence has been overwhelming showing 70-90% reduction in severe illness and mortality.
Through Dec. 31, UKHSA had recorded just 75 deaths among 212,019 omicron cases (0.04% fatality rate). They have since discontinued omicron surveillance.
A tale of two groups of cities: the ones people are flying to visit and the ones they're not.
Rate of change in destination enplanements for airports of at least 100,000 enplanements in 2019 in Florida, Texas, California, and New York for Jan-Oct 2021 vs. same months 2019.
What you're seeing is that 7 of these 60 airports are higher in the first 10 months of 2021 than they were in the same months in 2019... all 7 of which were in Florida. Florida (red) and Texas (orange) make up most of the upper half.
Collectively, Florida airports are 10.6% lower in 2021 through October than they were in 2019. Texas -21.3%, California -41.3% and New York -46.3%. The national total is down 28.2%.
Another 'expert' that hopes you don't realize surgical masks are not respiratory protection. Yes, they are meant to keep patients protected against coughs, sneezes, large droplets, bacteria, etc. They are absolutely not nor have they ever been respiratory protection vs. viruses.
Just to keep reminding people, below is a graph from the CDC in early 2020, which I believe can still be found on their site.
"Does NOT provide the wearer with a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles and is not considered respiratory protection."
SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is a "small airborne particle."
The average particle, 0.1 microns, is 97% smaller than the standard surgical mask pore (3 microns).