I don't necessarily think they should.
But in order to make an argument for masks in my local community/school district, I'd like to be able to balance the harms.
So on one hand, we have a very, very small percentage of kids that have died from COVID. So obviously very, very limited benefit to wearing masks, but I'm sure you'll concede nonetheless that there is some very, very small benefit.
What do we have to balance that against? What is the harm that is caused to kids by having them wear masks? That's what I'm asking.
Usually, when we talk about these things at school board meetings or community chat groups, the anti-mask people just keep coming back to personal freedom. They can't cite to any cognizable, harmful effects from wearing masks. So I stupidly came to a soccer forum to ask if someone could cite to anything. In my defense, these threads comprise thousands of posts, some of which are interesting evaluations of legitimate studies, so I assumed that somewhere down the line, someone could identify whether any kids had suffered harmful effects (illness, death, hospitalization, whatever.)
Here's a list of some costs, not comprehensive:
-Some kids are ADHD or Autistic sensitive. Some jurisdictions are allowing waivers for these kids, some are making it very difficult (like LA County), and some do not allow a waiver (LA County did not allow waivers for anyone last year).
-For the younger children, they learn in part through facial expressions. Remember all those articles about the importance of children with "face time" For the hearing impaired as well, viewing the face is critical.
-They are just uncomfortable for many people. If you dispute that, ask why Pelosi, Newsom, Fauci, and other politicians/health experts were caught cheating when the cameras weren't rolling.
-There is a communicative/societal value in seeing people's faces. We know for example movies and television programs and news programs filmed during the pandemic got waivers. If there wasn't any value to it, why aren't films/tv/news filmed during the pandemic filmed with masks on? It shouldn't make a difference, correct?
-There's the environmental damage from masks. The non-cloth ones take a long time to degrade. Remember when people were freaking out about plastic straws and plastic bags. Those masks are supposed to be single use. Even the N95s pre pandemic were supposed to be single use. The environmental damage is huge, and would be worse if people wore them correctly.
So let's not pretend that masks are a cost free solution. Granted, the cost is relatively lower than lockdowns. But a balance still has to be taken of the costs against the benefits. On the benefits end, Hound has articulated that there seems to be very little benefit for kids wearing masks in schools, plus we know we are out of step with the other western countries that don't require it. Given that, unless the pro mask side can demonstrate some beneficial evidence that outweighs the costs, they shouldn't be required in schools.
Now I'm not saying that masks should never be required anywhere. I supported pre vaccine the indoor masks mandates. But we need to have a discussion about better masking and where it should be required (airplanes yes, schools absolutely not. supermarkets it depends what approach we need to the pandemic and if believe Gottlieb or the UK)