Why are we not surprised?
Here's what Wendy posted on her FB page this morning:
The results of a just-released Yale University study suggest child care centers that stayed open during the early months of the Chinese virus shutdown did not contribute to the spread of the disease in the United States and that children did not spread the virus to adults.Researchers looked at responses from 57,335 daycare providers, including those that continued to provide child care and those that did not, during the first three months of the pandemic and found that there were “no differences in COVID-19 outcomes."“The amount of contact they had with child care was completely unrelated to whether or not they got sick with COVID-19 or were hospitalized with COVID-19,” Walter Gilliam, a professor at the Yale Child Care Center and lead author of the study said.With the CDC reporting a survival rate of 99.99% in people ages 0-19, do you think schools should re-open immediately, that kids should play sports without masks, and that we should get back in the business of living as free people?
We'll note, in passing, Wendy's racist naming of the coronavirus. Hey, Wendy! Need any evidence that it's harmful?
Look here:
A recent study shows that rampant use of the “China virus" to refer to the coronavirus, particularly by conservative outlets, had a profound impact on how those in the United States see Asian Americans.
The research, published in the journal Health Education & Behavior, examined racially charged coronavirus coverage in media and its impact on bias against Asian Americans. While anti-Asian bias had been in steady decline for over a decade, the trend reversed in days after a significant uptick in discriminatory coronavirus speech. The language led to an increased subconscious belief that Asian Americans are “perpetual foreigners,” researchers said.
“Research suggests that when people see Asian Americans as being more ‘foreign,’ they are more likely to express hostility toward them and engage in acts of violence and discrimination,” Rucker Johnson, a public policy professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and co-author of the study, told NBC Asian America.
Good for you, Wendy. You're now part of that chain of events.
But back to the Yale study. Of course Wendy's framing is incorrect. The study (described here) was about child care programs and yet Wendy is using it to deny the public health danger all the way up to the end of High School. I mean, what child care center has "kids playing sports" with masks??
In any event, had Wendy done her due diligence, she would have found this, from one of the authors of the study:
The study’s authors caution that their findings do not necessarily apply to teachers who work in schools or other settings with older children. “Adults who work with infants, toddlers, and preschoolers typically have a small group of children who stay together all day,” said [lead author Walter Gilliam, the Elizabeth Mears and House Jameson Professor at the Yale Child Study Center and professor of psychology. ] “Middle schools and high schools may have hundreds of people in a building — and typically, moving from class to class. Those factors alone make K-12 schools very different from child care programs.” [Emphasis added.]
See that, Wendy? The study you're citing to support opening up middle and high schools is not about middle or high schools - the lead author of the study even says so.
And this misinformation to her many many devotees, Wendy's danger-denial continues.
