3 ms·

You mentioned statistics in another comment of yours, just slightly above this one. Can you show me statistics regarding this "real and obvious risk of psychol

You mentioned statistics in another comment of yours, just slightly above this one. Can you show me statistics regarding this "real and obvious risk of psychological and social harm" of children wearing masks?

twofornone 5y ago
That's disingenuous. These statistics won't necessarily manifest for years, if they're teased out of sociological data at all. Someone has to go looking for them in the first place, and in this environment its unlikely that anyone will stick their neck out to suggest that masks are counterproductive. This is the danger of politicized science. It becomes one sided and a-scientific.
PKop 5y ago
No, I don't need statistics to understand covering the faces of young children for extended periods is going to harm their social development. Do you disagree that social cues are important, and come from facial expressions? Do you need a study for this? I sure don't. I guess we'll have to see which children have stronger development going forward.. masked or unmasked schools. It's a risk I certainly wouldn't take with my own kids.
- p_j_w 5y ago
  >I don't need statistics to understand covering the faces of young children for extended periods is going to harm their social development. You're literally saying you don't require evidence for your views and trying to frame this as a virtue?
  - PKop 5y ago
    Yes. 100%. Of course it is a virtue to have the right instincts and judgement, and not need studies to function in life and make all decisions, when choices have to be made one way or the other, studies or not. What possible study could give you definitive information to decide here? Social "sciences" are rife with replication errors, the whole industry is suspicious. But so what? This is such a modern hyper rational mode of thinking. It's a weak mentality to be unable to use experience and judgement to act and decide but to defer to dubious "experts" to tell you how to live and raise your own children in the context of something so obvious as "kids need to see faces and be seen to develop socially" given masks don't stop the spread of covid and they're not at risk anyways; they should have normal social interaction and not live in a bubble for 2 years. We already know the risk from covid for kids is virtually non-existent. You're willing to risk their social development because no one told you to do otherwise yet? How did your ancestors navigate such perilous environments and situations without a bunch of studies to tell them what the "facts" are for every decision? They had to think for themselves quite often, using their wisdom and intuition
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      The problem with your self righteousness is that it is not obvious at all that masks are damaging to children. That thinking seems completely silly to me. Such an irreverent unimportant thing as a mask mattering.

twofornone 5y ago

That's disingenuous. These statistics won't necessarily manifest for years, if they're teased out of sociological data at all. Someone has to go looking for them in the first place, and in this environment its unlikely that anyone will stick their neck out to suggest that masks are counterproductive. This is the danger of politicized science. It becomes one sided and a-scientific.

PKop 5y ago

No, I don't need statistics to understand covering the faces of young children for extended periods is going to harm their social development. Do you disagree that social cues are important, and come from facial expressions? Do you need a study for this? I sure don't. I guess we'll have to see which children have stronger development going forward.. masked or unmasked schools. It's a risk I certainly wouldn't take with my own kids.

p_j_w 5y ago
>I don't need statistics to understand covering the faces of young children for extended periods is going to harm their social development. You're literally saying you don't require evidence for your views and trying to frame this as a virtue?
- PKop 5y ago
  Yes. 100%. Of course it is a virtue to have the right instincts and judgement, and not need studies to function in life and make all decisions, when choices have to be made one way or the other, studies or not. What possible study could give you definitive information to decide here? Social "sciences" are rife with replication errors, the whole industry is suspicious. But so what? This is such a modern hyper rational mode of thinking. It's a weak mentality to be unable to use experience and judgement to act and decide but to defer to dubious "experts" to tell you how to live and raise your own children in the context of something so obvious as "kids need to see faces and be seen to develop socially" given masks don't stop the spread of covid and they're not at risk anyways; they should have normal social interaction and not live in a bubble for 2 years. We already know the risk from covid for kids is virtually non-existent. You're willing to risk their social development because no one told you to do otherwise yet? How did your ancestors navigate such perilous environments and situations without a bunch of studies to tell them what the "facts" are for every decision? They had to think for themselves quite often, using their wisdom and intuition
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    The problem with your self righteousness is that it is not obvious at all that masks are damaging to children. That thinking seems completely silly to me. Such an irreverent unimportant thing as a mask mattering.