LASD's Mask Mandate is Merely an Illusion

[XLFD]

The Ludington Area School District (LASD) Board is set to meet at 6 PM tomorrow (11-15-21) for their regular November meeting and are set to consider a few items following a lost week where school was called off due to 'staff shortages'.  That Monday, when at that time only that day had been called off, I spoke before the school board just before they interviewed and picked the next school superintendent. 

I opined that the staff shortage was largely a product of their own making, in that the arbitrary mask mandate they imposed on staff and students, rather than making it a personal medical choice, led to a lowering of morale for those who came to the scientific conclusion that the masks were doing more harm than good.  One doubts whether the four board members responsible for the mandate based on a bizarre metric of test positivity rate and based contrarily to the local and state health department who adopted no mandate, only a recommendation, would reconsider their school-closing policy.

The week off allowed them to fulfill one of my FOIA requests, however, dealing with inspecting their "non medical mask exemption forms" which was sent to me in a series of 8 emails including about 330 forms. Staff and students who wanted to be exempt from wearing masks at LASD schools could fill these out in order to bypass the mandate-- if the form was approved.  But as I was interested in rejected forms too, part of the request was for the rationales LASD used to reject such exemptions.

Surprisingly, none of the 330 requests to be exempted were denied, even though no less than 17 forms contained any basis or explanation for an exemption, nor were there any grading system used to assess denial of a mask exemption request. 

What this effectively means is that there really is no mask mandate in place, as long as you submit the form, despite what the bottom of the form says or implies:

Quite simply, any parent, guardian, emancipated student, or staff member who wants to go without a mask, or have flexibility to choose when and when not to mask up, have the choice to do so just by filling out this form for themselves or their children.  The board's mask mandate is a paper tiger policy, it appears to be threateningly restrictive, but it has no teeth once you take a minute to fill out and sign a form then give it to an administrator's secretary.

The TPR mask mandate passed by Board members, Mike Nagle, Bret Autrey, Stephany Reed, and Steve Carlson is wearing no clothes, so I will be laughing at those four fools at tomorrow night's meeting in the auditorium, as they pass their one microphone around the table among themselves to spread their own contagions while they virtue signal their medical knowledge supremacy by wearing face coverings that do nothing to prevent community spread of viruses.  

I have posted the 330 or so non-medical mask exemption forms at my sister site made for dumping larger files, Ludi-Leaks.  Almost all of the information that would identify a form to a student/staff member have been removed from the one-page records.  Though classified as 'non-medical' exemptions, most of the reasons making the basis for the exemptions actually are medical in nature, including the reason most often gave.  Here's a brief synopsis of the reasons that LASD staff and students gave in order to ask for a mask exemption, and it's popularity in comparison to other reasons.  Many forms gave multiple rationales in forming their basis for exemption:

1)  Difficulty Breathing/Asthma (96):  

2)  Already vaccinated (87): 

3)  Masks negatively affect learning/communication (63):

4)  Limits freedom/flexibility (55):

5)  Mental health/issues (51):

6)  Religious/personal beliefs (44):

7)  Headaches/Dizziness (35):

8)  DHD/CDC not mandating (34):

9)  Stress/Anxiety (31):

10) "Masks don't work!" (30):

11) Not able to focus concentrate (29):

12) Acne/facial irritation (21):  

These twelve classifications are not exhaustive, other reasons given that mustered at least ten votes:  Constitutionality/legality, allergies, already had Covid, masks weaken immunity, overheating issues, glasses fogging, PTSD/ADHD/autism, and 'no reason'.  My personal favorite, though hard to classify:

There are plenty of brief testimonials by staff and parents telling of negative effects of mask wearing over these last two years, medical and not, showing how using a one size mask fits all approach to this policy is not healthy or sane.  

The LASD Board needs to recognize that their policy is a failure rather than ride this failure out through the school year.  They could do so without admitting their three month mistake, by doing what Mason County Central did last month, and go to a system where staff and parents aren't left out of their own (and their children's) medical choices.  After tomorrow, if they haven't figured it out yet, they will be reminded that their existing policy only makes a lot more paperwork-- paperwork that shows their policy is purposeless and puerile.  Even those parents and staff members who want mask mandates will be figuring that out, soon enough.

[Willy]

Excellent article X. That was a lot of work. Who, other than a mathematician, would categorize and organize the exemptions so that it would help focus on the issue. Your dedication to the Ludington community and it's welfare is extremely commendable. 

I am very proud of Ludington's parents and students for standing up to this nonsense.

[XLFD]

To actually trust in science, and not be someone who just falls for the latest scheme labelled as science, one needs to be willing to use the scientific method to back up any hypothesis you make.  Four members of the board are too lazy to figure out that a significant portion of their staff and students (about 1 in 6) are fearful enough of health issues, or multiple non-health issues, to get an exemption.  This eclipses observed behavior noted during the latter half of 2020 at local chain stores that had mask mandates, where less than 1 in 20 people were observed w/o masks.  

Students and staff have dozens of reasons about why masks are interfering with their physical health, their learning, their mental health-- some of the 51 mentioning severe mental health issues and the 31 claiming mere anxiety/stress indicate that mental health issues should be at the top of any discussions regarding masks, but the foolish four have ignored it completely, since DHD #10 came out with their 'propaganda science' which completely ignores all the problems found in these forms.  

I felt classification was important to show everybody that what they may experience when wearing a mask is not an anomaly.  I can verify for myself that I could personally use to some degree all but #2 and #12 of the top twelve reasons listed above.

Let's hope that word gets around that parents and staff can regain their autonomy by just putting their name and signature on a one page form.

[RK Hubbard]

Here is a reference to 49 scientific studies that prove that masks reduce the spread of viral diseases: https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-here-are-4...

[Willy]

Thanks for the post RK

I've read the article and some of the links. In the opening paragraphs the reporter that wrote the article says " At the onset of the pandemic, there was slim evidence to either prove or disprove the effectiveness of mask-wearing to slow the spread of this particular coronavirus because, obviously, COVID-19 was a new disease." Then in the same opening explanation he states "This lack of information was perhaps confusing for many but millions in the scientific community quickly jumped to help the world understand this disease better. They built upon years of existing data on coronaviruses and communicable diseases." So which is it? They had little evidence to prove or disprove" or "they built upon years of existing data on coronaviruses and communicable diseases"? I say it's more BS to appease the peasants again.

Any person with just a small amount of common sense understands that, most likely, all of the research cited by the reporter was done with Government funds.

In the article under Peer Reviewed studies it states below

Peer-reviewed studies:

1. Researchers (including a CDC doctor) for a February 2021 article published by the Journal of the American Medical Association reviewed data from 10 previous studies conclude mask wearing substantially reduces spread.  They write that wearing a cloth mask can reduce transmission of exhaled droplets from infected wearers into the air by around 50% to 70%.

Just where did this exhaled droplets go? If 50% to 70% stayed in the mask, then it would be only           a matter of minutes before the mask would be saturated with moisture and unfit to wear. Did the moisture go back into the lungs. If so it would not be long until someone wearing a mask would drown in their own fluids.

I could spend all day debunking these reports as being propaganda but I don't have the time. I compare these research papers to the King who wore no clothes story. The King and his cronies tried their hardest to convince the people that he had clothes but in fact if one looked carefully with their eyes and mind open the truth becomes clear. 

We can go back and forth on this but it boils down to a simple test. Just open your eyes and use your logic.

Seeing is believing

.

 

           

[XLFD]

Good review, Willy, and I would add that I already took a little time to look at 11 of the 'peer-reviewed studies' in this article when the LASD school board established their inane mask mandate based on test positivity rates.

The science is very weak and contrived, any reasonable scientific peer would take issue as I did-- except for the fact that they would lose funding and potentially their job for being a heretic to the orthodox church of junk science.  Their idea of science is taking an unscientific phone survey of two infected Missouri hairdresser's clients.  Never enough rigor (*sigh*)

Thanks for the studies RK, if there is something in there that has any weight behind it, any study that I haven't already debunked for the garbage it was, please highlight it and tell me why it solidly backs your premises.

[RK Hubbard]

"A study of an outbreak (of Covid 19) aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, an environment notable for congregate living quarters and close working environments, found that use of face coverings on-board was associated with a 70% reduced risk."

You guys continue to cite debunked and older studies that have been superseded by new scientific findings. You also cite fringe "doctors" and anecdotes instead of bona-fide, peer-reviewed academic literature. And when others cite such literature, you simply call them "weak and contrived." A world-wide pandemic is ongoing and you think its all a giant conspiracy. 

[XLFD]

RK, If you actually read through the study and you had a background in the scientific method, you would not present that as a study worthy of proving your point.  As I wrote in that article linked to above about this same study:

Payne, USS Theodore Roosevelt:  In this 'study', a sample of 392 service members aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt found those who reported wearing face masks had a 56% infection rate compared to an 81% rate among those who did not wear them.  The report does not indicate whether the sampling was random or representative of the full population, nor describe why some of the ship's populations were wearing mask and some were not, or whether those wearing face coverings did so 24/7 in the confined spaces, which is extremely unlikely or only when they were on duty or in certain areas of the ship. 

We know that ventilation and other factors could also come into play on the ship, the report lists four other limitations, which leads to the modest conclusion:  "Use of face coverings and other preventive measures could mitigate transmission."

For a study to mean something they just can't have so many variables running around freely, that's why randomized control tests are the gold standard as they seek to minimize variables.  These types of tests have shown throughout the decades that masks worn by the healthy population are not a viable method to control community spread.  You can point to this study and the Missouri hairdresser studies all you want, that doesn't make them rigorous science worth following.

[RK Hubbard]

I knew you would find fault with the USS Theodore Roosevelt study, because you disagree with every single one of the 50 studies I have cited so far. In fact, you cannot bring yourself to accept the findings of any study that disagrees with your conspiracy theory. Meanwhile, you cite anecdotal quotes from a few students at a small-town high school and a video of some guy vaping as valid evidence. Anecdotes are not data, and the vast majority of actual data from worldwide studies support mask wearing. As for those poor LHS students, they had better learn to wear all kinds of PPE or be locked out of millions of jobs that require their use, including military, medicine, dentistry, construction, research and testing laboratories, personal care, EMS, and many others. 

[Willy]

RK. I think it's true to say you are obsessed with masks. I frankly don't care if people wear them or not but you think forcing people to wear them is OK. This is what really separates those who want to  control  others from those who view freedom as an essential part of life. The Left wants to strong arm people into obeying no matter what the cost. Those who cherish freedom will not be mandated into wearing masks. Is that so hard for you to understand? Would you like a membership in the Communist Party USA? I think you would agree with most of the propaganda they preach. 

 "As for those poor LHS students, they had better learn to wear all kinds of PPE or be locked out of millions of jobs that require their use, including military, medicine, dentistry, construction, research and testing laboratories, personal care, EMS, and many others."

RK Hubbard

[RK Hubbard]

Willy, I make decisions based on facts and evidence, which, in the case of mask-wearing, overwhelmingly favors their use. You, however, seem to be obsessed with "The Left" and are viscerally afraid of communism and "creeping socialism." This is typical of right-wing conspiracy theorists who think that every governmental action taken to "promote the general welfare" is another step towards slavery. I think that promoting the general welfare includes implementing policies that keep citizens healthy and productive. Your conspiratorial opinions about government are bizarre. I cite your cartoon as evidence. 

[Willy]

RK, in the "facts and evidence" you make your decisions on, Is anything mentioned about the detrimental and devastating affects masks have on children's mental and physical health?

I'm not obsessed with the Left. But the Left is obsessed with fundamentally changing this Country, eliminating freedoms and rights, controlling every part of society and rendering free speech to the trash pile. This is Communist doctrine and the "facts and evidence" show that America, our Country, is in decline because of the Left. What I'm concerned with are people like you who go along with this mindset that anything negative that is said or presented about Communism, Fascism and oppressive Socialism or the Left is a right wing conspiracy. The following is taken from your above post. I added some wording to clarify exactly what it means.

"This is typical of right-wing conspiracy theorists [people with common sense] who think that every governmental action taken [securing of power over the people by taking away freedoms and rights} to "promote the general welfare" [promote anarchy, fear and oppression]  is another step towards slavery [slavery is accurate]. I think that promoting [forcing ] the general welfare includes implementing [forcing] policies [demands] that keep citizens healthy and productive [obedient and subjugated]. Your conspiratorial opinions [documented and true] about government are bizarre [difficult to understand]. I cite your cartoon as evidence [not really evidence, it's just a silly picture]."

[Willy]

A covid date night