A few tweets featuring supposed 'science' on COVID stopped me in my tracks this week, as it appears some people are trying to revive the dangerous and debunked lie that schools were major vectors for the illness. False information about COVID -- not to be conflated with disputable or accurate claims reflexively mislabeled as 'misinformation' -- is roundly decried and often censored when it comes from one perspective; false information about COVID from the restrictionist worldview is too often celebrated in supposedly reputable circles. It's early 2023 and some people are evidently still intent on 'proving' that open and operating schools were a major culprit in the pandemic:
"School was the biggest public source of COVID-19 transmission."— Anthony LaMesa (@ajlamesa) January 17, 2023
“Daycare wasn’t associated with COVID-19 infection, neither was going to a healthcare facility or the grocery store—just in-person school."
Kind of an incredible claim to make...https://t.co/JtxQhcXhpP pic.twitter.com/RvgQXAgLml
In reality, multiple studies from multiple countries, drawing upon a vast footprint of evidence, made clear by the fall of 2020 that the opposite was actually true. Those studies continued to pile up in 2021 and 2022, as well. The real science was clear, but the fear-mongering school-shutters never accepted it, to the profound detriment of affected children. So how do false claims like the one highlighted above get published this past fall? Through sloppiness and drawing causal conclusions not supported by the actual evidence: "This was an NIH study done during the second half of 2020, so I suspect there's a lot of confounding going on here based on the places where school was in person and places where it wasn't, and who chose in person school and who didn't," writes one expert who has done yeoman's work in tackling junk COVID studies in recent years. This is her very plausible theory on how this bogus premise was declared 'proven:'
This actually seems like it's mostly just a correlation based on the fact that cases were highest in late fall when the more kids were in school (and low when schools were mostly closed), whereas exposures via other sources were much more consistent over time. pic.twitter.com/KROejH30jd— Kelley K (@KelleyKga) January 17, 2023
Then just yesterday, the American Medical Association published a piece on its website entitled, "Why kids are 'great little vectors' for COVID-19," which is simultaneously cutesy, hysterical, and wrong. The wrongness of it was evident, and being highlighted by doctors in the New York Times, two-and-a-half years ago. The data continues to show this. Nobody should argue that kids can't spread COVID, but the assertion or implication that they're uniquely efficient (and therefore dangerous) transmitters of the disease is inaccurate. It is beyond irresponsible for the AMA to be amplifying shoddy claims designed to stir fear, especially featuring outrageous statement like this:
No, "looking back," closing schools was absolutely not "an effective way" of cutting COVID transmission. "The math shows that with a lower transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools as compared with in the community, it is safer for kids to be at school than at home," a pair of pediatricians wrote in late 2020, reflecting the real science. "Teachers and schools are essential for children’s growth and well-being." The anti-science closures did, however, cut back on learning, social development, and overall well-being. Those policies inflicted real harm. More:
The @AmerMedicalAssn says that kids are "great little vectors" for Covid, thus school closures were/are all justified.— Margery Smelkinson, Ph.D. (@MSmelkinsonPhD) January 17, 2023
But this meta-analysis of 54 studies looking at index cases says just the opposite. The gaslighting is endless.https://t.co/Vid73MrO5r https://t.co/sGDOwcQa9y pic.twitter.com/UWD8DfFBkD
It is astounding that some people are trying to cling to very deleterious ideological folklore under the auspices of 'science,' and I fear Mary Katharine Ham is right that some 'experts' would revert right back to the harm if given the chance to impose control on people's lives in this way again. Control is addictive -- which is what this legal battle is about, on another front of the COVID wars:
Today — January 17, 2023, almost three years after the pandemic began — the Biden administration is in federal court arguing to reinstate forced masking on airplanes. https://t.co/rquH1X8j5h— Jake Schneider (@jacobkschneider) January 17, 2023
The Eleventh Circuit of Appeals will hear arguments over a federal mask mandate on Tuesday, Jan. 17. Back in April, a federal judge in Florida struck down a mask mandate for planes and other transportation. The CDC countered by requesting an appeal, which was quickly filed by the Justice Department...The appeal drew criticism from the U.S. Travel Association, which along with other industry groups had been pressuring the Biden administration for months to end the mask mandate for travel. The Health Freedom Defense Fund outlined arguments in court documents, stating they believe the CDC has no legal authority to adopt a mask mandate. Proponents of a transportation mask mandate, including the American Medical Association, state that a mask requirement on transportation is a reasonable way to curb the spread of COVID-19. They also argue that the CDC could end the mandate in the future given the right circumstances.
Ah, there they are again -- the politicized American Medical Association. One wonder if they'd also determine that hypothetical school closures could also finally be ended at some point, "given the right circumstances," of course. The Science establishment has done so much to destroy its own credibility and undermine public faith. People suspect politics at play because far too often, politics are at play. Now the Biden administration wants the power to again force travelers to wear masks, which has been a choice people have been making for themselves for the better part of a year, throughout COVID surges and ebbs. Per data, by the way, mask mandates don't work. I'll leave you with this:
Dr. Wen wrote a piece along these lines in the Washington Post last week, drawing anger from the COVID cult, but also backlash from others who more understandably argue that such admissions are coming much too late.