7 ms·

Masks Can Be Detrimental to Babies' Speech and Language Development

45 points by LittleMoveBig 5y ago

retrac 5y ago
The visual channel is far more important for understanding speech than most people with normal hearing realize. Take a video recording of someone speaking. Add noise to the audio until the threshold of intelligibility. Around the point where many words are lost and it's hard to follow, but you can still catch snippets and hear at least parts of most words. Listen to the audio for a bit. Then switch on the video too. Many people will suddenly understand the speaker effortlessly. It's quite jarring if you're particularly susceptible! Similarly, visual information will sometimes take priority over what is heard when decoding speech if you set it up so they conflict: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGurk_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGurk_effect
- baash05 5y ago
  I've had instances where I was in the room with someone speaking a language I only partially understood. The non-verbal queues often were the major mechanic for communicating.
Gareth321 5y ago
This has been known for decades. It's just that this fact conflicts with the mask-mandate crowd so any talk of it was cause for being banned from YouTube, Reddit, and Twitter. I am so disappointed with the level of allowed debate over the last two years. Warring ideological factions with absolutely no qualms with suppressing uncomfortable facts which were not in service to their chosen dogma. I'm not sure what the path forward is here but we need a collective retrospective to make sure we never, ever do this again.
- WaxedChewbacca 5y ago
- piva00 5y ago
  And this kind of discourse framing the side you consider hysterical as "the mask-mandate crowd" is just playing into the exact thing you are criticising. So I'm very sure we all need to look ourselves in the mirror.
  - loceng 5y ago
    How would you more accurately describe that group?
    - ykevinator2 5y ago
  - Gareth321 5y ago
    I consider that to be factually correct. How would you describe the group which advocates for mask mandates?
  - throw_life 5y ago
    Try being called "anti mask antivaxx Covidiot granny-killer" for two years and then we can talk about unfair discourse framing. I take your point though - we all have a lot to learn about how we are going to come back together as a society.
  - taylorius 5y ago
    "So I'm very sure we all need to look ourselves in the mirror." The problem with this "everyone's to blame, lets just heal and move on" is that what happened never gets addressed. There have been serious policy failures, along with possible corruption and collusion between institutions that are supposed to be above reproach. Institutions that we need to trust. People were told to "listen to the science" - and they did, largely. They trusted "the science" with their lives. Now it seems Pfizer petitioned a court to keep their vaccine trial data private for 75 years. That doesn't sound very scientific to me. Nor does the published video call between two UK scientists arguing about the suppression of data related to Ivermectin. But no, "science" is fine - we're all to blame, so lets just move on, right?
light_hue_1 5y ago
Sensationalist garbage "science". Scientific American should be ashamed of itself. The author, David J. Lewkowicz from Yale, is trying to shove his totally unrelated study on lip reading into the debate in order to get exposure. As a scientist, I'm ashamed that a colleague would do this on such a serious issue. There is literally zero evidence that masks are harmful provided in the article or in any of the research done. Not a single study. Not even one number. This article should be titled "I think that masks can be detrimental". And that thought should carry all of the weight of a random conjecture by a random person who knows nothing on the topic because it simply hasn't been studied. PS: Blind children learn language just fine. There is no significant evidence anywhere that blind children's understanding of language and their ability to speak is any lesser than that of sighted children. So this conjecture by this disgraceful researcher is probably very false.
- retrac 5y ago
  > There is no significant evidence anywhere that blind children's understanding of language and their ability to speak is any lesser than that of sighted children. I'm not an expert but this is from a 2015 paper which does a literature review citing many papers arguing just that. > In summary, although the research to date is not fully supportive of a link between VI and SSP deficits, the mixed evidence provokes compelling reasons to hypothesize that access to visual cues supports early speech perception and subsequent auditory discrimination and phonological mapping. - Brouwer et al.: SSP Deficits in Children With Visual Impairment (2015) https://pubs.asha.org/doi/pdf/10.1044/cicsd_42_S_33 https://pubs.asha.org/doi/pdf/10.1044/cicsd_42_S_33 I would agree it's not exactly an air-tight case (as would Brouwer et al given their hedging), but you are making a very strong claim with "no significant evidence anywhere".
  - blueboo 5y ago
    There are many visual cues still apparent with a mask on, therefore it’s challenging to make any assertions on “evidence” on correlations between mask-wearing and the experience of children with visual impairment. (Nevermind the article mostly (and sloppily) addresses the mere existence of masks and not their likely-relevant usage patterns.)
totesraunch 5y ago
As if parents are sitting around at home talking to their babies with masks on...
- votepaunchy 5y ago
  As if parents are home all day with their babies and young children.
- choko 5y ago
  A lot of us have to utilize daycare where masking is mandatory. How this escaped you before making this comment is beyond me.
  - IshKebab 5y ago
    Nursery workers haven't worn masks while working for ages. I'm not sure they did even at the start of the pandemic.
throw_life 5y ago
Frankly, in my opinion this is obvious. The role of the whole face in the social development of babies is very well known - I'm sure we all heard the story about ducklings being imprinted with human faces after being hatched in an incubator. It's not limited to life in the home either - I really don't like that most of the people my small children have seen outside the house have been masked. In fact, when people try to interact with our kids with the typical smiling and cooing, and get limited response, I have taken to telling them that it might be because my kids can't see their expressions. The issue I see is that, at least where I live, the public messaging has been "there is no downside to wearing a mask, just put it on". This has, in my opinion, done huge damage to the credibility of science-based public messaging. A much more honest and accurate message would have been "there are some downsides, but based on our understanding of the evidence, we think the benefits outweigh the risks".
- ThunderSizzle 5y ago
  Honest and accurate messaging needs to be this: 1) A mask probably won't protect you. 2) a mask might protect someone else if you spit while talking or sneeze/cough without covering yourself 3) however, a mask might make people who run on feelings feel better around you 4) masks might cause anxiety and developmental issues due to lack of human connection if it is widespread and consistent Then let people decide.
  - d1sxeyes 5y ago
    It is astounding that in 2022, there are still people saying such provably untrue things as 'a mask probably won't protect you'. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html#anchor_1619457332454 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br... https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2014564118 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2014564118 https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/m20-6817 https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/m20-6817
    - glofish 5y ago
      Above you are citing the DANMASK study that found a tiny effect size of −0.3 (!) percentage points with no statistical significance to mask wearing. In what world would that be evidence that masks work? For what is worth, at this point there is little reason to cite and refer to these early publications and estimates anyway. Those were early guesses in a hysterical world. Empirical, observable direct evidence from countries where masks are mandatory, from Germany (N95! is mandatory) to South Korea, Hong Kong etc makes it evident that masks have no effect on the spread of this particular disease.
zthrowaway 5y ago
As a parent I’ve had tons of concern around this, instinctively felt this is the case but most people I spoke to about it (mostly non-parents) rolled their eyes and didn’t want to hear it. Here we are.
Overtonwindow 5y ago
I think most rational people know masks are terrible for children and infants, but its good to have documented science to back it up. That wont convince pro maskers but maybe its enough to let the kids see each other smile.
- infamouscow 5y ago
  That should have been the case prior to introducing a mask mandate, not after the policy has taken effect.
jinushaun 5y ago
I guess someone forgot to tell Asia about this western scientific “discovery”. I can’t take anything written in the West—-both for and against—seriously regarding mask wearing. Both sides have lost their minds regarding masks wearing, something that is incredible common in Asia before Covid.

45 points by LittleMoveBig 5y ago

The visual channel is far more important for understanding speech than most people with normal hearing realize. Take a video recording of someone speaking. Add noise to the audio until the threshold of intelligibility. Around the point where many words are lost and it's hard to follow, but you can still catch snippets and hear at least parts of most words. Listen to the audio for a bit. Then switch on the video too. Many people will suddenly understand the speaker effortlessly. It's quite jarring if you're particularly susceptible! Similarly, visual information will sometimes take priority over what is heard when decoding speech if you set it up so they conflict: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGurk_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGurk_effect

baash05 5y ago
I've had instances where I was in the room with someone speaking a language I only partially understood. The non-verbal queues often were the major mechanic for communicating.

Gareth321 5y ago

This has been known for decades. It's just that this fact conflicts with the mask-mandate crowd so any talk of it was cause for being banned from YouTube, Reddit, and Twitter. I am so disappointed with the level of allowed debate over the last two years. Warring ideological factions with absolutely no qualms with suppressing uncomfortable facts which were not in service to their chosen dogma. I'm not sure what the path forward is here but we need a collective retrospective to make sure we never, ever do this again.

WaxedChewbacca 5y ago
piva00 5y ago
And this kind of discourse framing the side you consider hysterical as "the mask-mandate crowd" is just playing into the exact thing you are criticising. So I'm very sure we all need to look ourselves in the mirror.
- loceng 5y ago
  How would you more accurately describe that group?
  - ykevinator2 5y ago
- Gareth321 5y ago
  I consider that to be factually correct. How would you describe the group which advocates for mask mandates?
- throw_life 5y ago
  Try being called "anti mask antivaxx Covidiot granny-killer" for two years and then we can talk about unfair discourse framing. I take your point though - we all have a lot to learn about how we are going to come back together as a society.
- taylorius 5y ago
  "So I'm very sure we all need to look ourselves in the mirror." The problem with this "everyone's to blame, lets just heal and move on" is that what happened never gets addressed. There have been serious policy failures, along with possible corruption and collusion between institutions that are supposed to be above reproach. Institutions that we need to trust. People were told to "listen to the science" - and they did, largely. They trusted "the science" with their lives. Now it seems Pfizer petitioned a court to keep their vaccine trial data private for 75 years. That doesn't sound very scientific to me. Nor does the published video call between two UK scientists arguing about the suppression of data related to Ivermectin. But no, "science" is fine - we're all to blame, so lets just move on, right?

light_hue_1 5y ago

Sensationalist garbage "science". Scientific American should be ashamed of itself. The author, David J. Lewkowicz from Yale, is trying to shove his totally unrelated study on lip reading into the debate in order to get exposure. As a scientist, I'm ashamed that a colleague would do this on such a serious issue. There is literally zero evidence that masks are harmful provided in the article or in any of the research done. Not a single study. Not even one number. This article should be titled "I think that masks can be detrimental". And that thought should carry all of the weight of a random conjecture by a random person who knows nothing on the topic because it simply hasn't been studied. PS: Blind children learn language just fine. There is no significant evidence anywhere that blind children's understanding of language and their ability to speak is any lesser than that of sighted children. So this conjecture by this disgraceful researcher is probably very false.

retrac 5y ago
> There is no significant evidence anywhere that blind children's understanding of language and their ability to speak is any lesser than that of sighted children. I'm not an expert but this is from a 2015 paper which does a literature review citing many papers arguing just that. > In summary, although the research to date is not fully supportive of a link between VI and SSP deficits, the mixed evidence provokes compelling reasons to hypothesize that access to visual cues supports early speech perception and subsequent auditory discrimination and phonological mapping. - Brouwer et al.: SSP Deficits in Children With Visual Impairment (2015) https://pubs.asha.org/doi/pdf/10.1044/cicsd_42_S_33 https://pubs.asha.org/doi/pdf/10.1044/cicsd_42_S_33 I would agree it's not exactly an air-tight case (as would Brouwer et al given their hedging), but you are making a very strong claim with "no significant evidence anywhere".
- blueboo 5y ago
  There are many visual cues still apparent with a mask on, therefore it’s challenging to make any assertions on “evidence” on correlations between mask-wearing and the experience of children with visual impairment. (Nevermind the article mostly (and sloppily) addresses the mere existence of masks and not their likely-relevant usage patterns.)

totesraunch 5y ago

As if parents are sitting around at home talking to their babies with masks on...

votepaunchy 5y ago
As if parents are home all day with their babies and young children.
choko 5y ago
A lot of us have to utilize daycare where masking is mandatory. How this escaped you before making this comment is beyond me.
- IshKebab 5y ago
  Nursery workers haven't worn masks while working for ages. I'm not sure they did even at the start of the pandemic.

throw_life 5y ago

Frankly, in my opinion this is obvious. The role of the whole face in the social development of babies is very well known - I'm sure we all heard the story about ducklings being imprinted with human faces after being hatched in an incubator. It's not limited to life in the home either - I really don't like that most of the people my small children have seen outside the house have been masked. In fact, when people try to interact with our kids with the typical smiling and cooing, and get limited response, I have taken to telling them that it might be because my kids can't see their expressions. The issue I see is that, at least where I live, the public messaging has been "there is no downside to wearing a mask, just put it on". This has, in my opinion, done huge damage to the credibility of science-based public messaging. A much more honest and accurate message would have been "there are some downsides, but based on our understanding of the evidence, we think the benefits outweigh the risks".

ThunderSizzle 5y ago
Honest and accurate messaging needs to be this: 1) A mask probably won't protect you. 2) a mask might protect someone else if you spit while talking or sneeze/cough without covering yourself 3) however, a mask might make people who run on feelings feel better around you 4) masks might cause anxiety and developmental issues due to lack of human connection if it is widespread and consistent Then let people decide.
- d1sxeyes 5y ago
  It is astounding that in 2022, there are still people saying such provably untrue things as 'a mask probably won't protect you'. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html#anchor_1619457332454 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br... https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2014564118 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2014564118 https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/m20-6817 https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/m20-6817
  - glofish 5y ago
    Above you are citing the DANMASK study that found a tiny effect size of −0.3 (!) percentage points with no statistical significance to mask wearing. In what world would that be evidence that masks work? For what is worth, at this point there is little reason to cite and refer to these early publications and estimates anyway. Those were early guesses in a hysterical world. Empirical, observable direct evidence from countries where masks are mandatory, from Germany (N95! is mandatory) to South Korea, Hong Kong etc makes it evident that masks have no effect on the spread of this particular disease.

zthrowaway 5y ago

As a parent I’ve had tons of concern around this, instinctively felt this is the case but most people I spoke to about it (mostly non-parents) rolled their eyes and didn’t want to hear it. Here we are.

Overtonwindow 5y ago

I think most rational people know masks are terrible for children and infants, but its good to have documented science to back it up. That wont convince pro maskers but maybe its enough to let the kids see each other smile.

infamouscow 5y ago
That should have been the case prior to introducing a mask mandate, not after the policy has taken effect.

jinushaun 5y ago

I guess someone forgot to tell Asia about this western scientific “discovery”. I can’t take anything written in the West—-both for and against—seriously regarding mask wearing. Both sides have lost their minds regarding masks wearing, something that is incredible common in Asia before Covid.