社区黑料

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

Updated

In early March, a pandemic celebrity best known for advocating that schools should move toward a pre-COVID normal wielded her weapon of choice, arguing in The Atlantic that lifting mask mandates for all but the youngest students is 鈥�.鈥�

Emily Oster laid out what she, and many others, understood to be the situation at hand in her opening paragraph: 鈥淎lthough the CDC recently moved to relax COVID guidelines, it continues to recommend universal indoor masking in early-childhood-education programs for those ages 2 and older.鈥澛�

The CDC鈥檚 coronavirus for child care providers, last updated Jan. 28, lists a number of 鈥渒ey takeaways,鈥� including that the agency 鈥渞ecommends universal indoor masking in [early childhood education] programs for those ages 2 years and older, regardless of vaccination status.鈥�

But in a surprising twist, about a week later, the Brown University economist posted an update on her Instagram story.

鈥淎fter my piece in @theatlantic last week, the CDC emailed me to let me know they DO NOT recommend masking for toddlers in areas with low or moderate transmission. Toddlers鈥� masking recommended to align with everyone else,鈥� she wrote. 鈥淭hey are struggling to get the message out so maybe this will help!鈥�

鈥淚 realize that seems a little crazy, but I am telling you that is the email I received from a senior person at the CDC.鈥�

The federal agency has a yellow banner at the top of its that says the CDC鈥檚 latest recommendations 鈥渁lign precautions for educational settings with those for other community settings.鈥�

鈥淭hat banner 鈥� is intended to replace all of the information that is below it in the bullets that say that kids should still be masking,鈥� Oster said in an Instagram video.

In late February, the CDC made major news when it replaced its previous recommendation that all schools require universal masking, stipulating instead that classrooms could now go mask-optional when community COVID rates were low or moderate, the current virus level across most of the country.

But without a vaccine available for those younger than 5, Oster and many others understood the guidance to apply only to K-12 schools, not early child care and pre-K programs. The CDC is 鈥渆asing its recommendations for wearing masks in indoor K-12 settings,鈥� the Los Angeles Times .

But in fact, the guidance was meant to apply to all educational levels, including those under 5.

In a Thursday email to 社区黑料, the CDC confirmed that 鈥渞ecommendations for masks in K-12 schools and early care and education (ECE) programs are consistent with recommendations for other community settings.鈥� 

鈥淐hildren ages 2-4 have a lower risk of severe disease from COVID-19 and parents of children in ECE programs as well as ECE staff can make appropriate choices about mask wearing in school settings based on local requirements and their personal levels of risk,鈥� wrote spokesperson Jade Fulce.

She did not explain why it has taken the agency several weeks to update its website, but said they would make the information available 鈥渁s soon as possible.鈥�

To New York City parent Daniela Jampel, whose 4-year-old daughter has continued masking while her older sister goes to school face exposed, the delay is unacceptable.

鈥淚t鈥檚 ridiculous,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he CDC is having trouble updating its website so they reach out to Emily Oster?鈥�

鈥淭heir website on this issue should not be left to interpretation. It should be very clear,鈥� said Jampel, an early advocate for amid remote learning and now an outspoken critic of the city鈥檚 decision to leave masking in place for preschoolers.

Oster agreed that the unconventional communication method underscores the widespread confusion on the issue, but clarified that the CDC did not contact her asking her to spread the word about their policy. Rather, they were correcting what they said was inaccurate information in her Atlantic piece.

鈥淭hey weren’t like, 鈥極h, by the way, it would be great if you could share with people this information,鈥欌�� Oster told 社区黑料. 鈥淭hey just said, 鈥楨verybody should already know this.鈥� But I think it’s pretty clear looking at 鈥� how people responded that they have not managed to make that clear.鈥�

Several parents, mostly in blue states like New Jersey, Connecticut and Illinois, responded to Oster鈥檚 update saying that their child care provider was still requiring masks, said the professor.

鈥淚 showed this (post) to my provider,鈥� many parents wrote, and in response were told, 鈥淲ell, if the website still says that masks are required, that鈥檚 not our interpretation of what that banner is.鈥�

鈥淭here is a fair amount of people looking to this guidance and trying to interpret it and the way that it is currently stated is extremely difficult to interpret clearly,鈥� said Oster.

The confusion extended to The Atlantic itself, which did not immediately update Oster鈥檚 original column to reflect the CDC鈥檚 clarified guidance after Oster received the agency鈥檚 email. In a follow-up interview with 社区黑料, Oster said she corresponded with her editor, but because the CDC had made no official announcement on how to interpret the vague website, the outlet decided not to alter its story at that time.

鈥淸The fact-checker] read the banner at the top, but then everything below it still said there should be masking,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t went under the radar.鈥�

However, after this story first published and 社区黑料 requested comment from The Atlantic, Oster鈥檚 piece was updated Thursday night to reflect the disconnect in the CDC鈥檚 guidance between the banner and the information below it.

Many early childhood education providers nationwide continue to require universal masking for 2- to 4-year olds.

Head Start, a federal school readiness program serving over 800,000 children from low-income families each year, 2-year-olds and up to wear face masks indoors, although in a Jan. 1 ruling, a U.S. district judge on the program鈥檚 rule in 24 states, mostly Republican. In the remaining 26 states, even those that long ago lifted their school mask mandates, participating toddlers are still required to cover up.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams cited hospitalization data when announcing earlier this month that the country’s largest school district was lifting its K-12 mask mandate but keeping the rule for 2- to 4-year-olds.

鈥淲hen you look at those under 5, they were more likely to be hospitalized,鈥� Adams . 鈥淧eople wanted to say, 鈥楲et’s lift it across the board,鈥� but that’s not what the science was showing us.鈥�

Masking in early child care settings is associated with a in program closures due to virus outbreaks, according to a recent study from doctors at Yale University. But the data were collected during the early months of the pandemic before vaccines were available to staff.

And while federal data show that hospitalizations for children under 5 did spike during the Omicron surge, an outsized share of that uptick was driven by newborns not yet 6 months old, who the masking guidance does not apply to anyway.

Meanwhile, COVID cases in Europe are , fueled by a more transmissible Omicron subvariant. Even as infections continue to , many experts warn that the increases across the pond could foreshadow a coming wave in America.

Jampel, despite frustration with the CDC鈥檚 haphazard rollout of its guidance for toddlers, doubts whether more clarity would impact the rules affecting her family. 

鈥淣ew York City schools have done many things that go far beyond what the CDC recommends,鈥� she said. 鈥淚’m not convinced that it鈥檚 the CDC holding us up, and I’m not convinced that a CDC change will mean that our political leaders will take notice and change their policies.鈥�

Neither the Department of Education nor the Department of Health immediately responded to requests for comment.

Steven Barnett, co-director of the National Institute for Early Education Research, said the two key questions on the issue are 鈥淲hat are the health benefits from masking young children?鈥� and 鈥淲hat are the developmental consequences?鈥�

鈥淭he problem with trying to be an expert on this issue is that there is very limited science on which to base conclusions,鈥� he told 社区黑料 in an email. 鈥淲ith respect to the health benefits, the known risks to young children from infection are quite small but this is a novel virus with unknown long-term risks.鈥�

鈥淎ll this leads me to think,鈥� he continued, 鈥渢hat masks for young children may be prudent when there is a high rate of community transmission鈥� 鈥� a conclusion that lands him in alignment with the now clarified CDC guidance.

But with all the CDC鈥檚 communication glitches along the way, Oster worries it will impact the public鈥檚 faith in the agency, which has been shaken several times throughout the two-year pandemic.

鈥淭his erodes trust,鈥� she said. 鈥淚f people are trying to trust the CDC, they’re trying to listen to them, when the messaging is confused in this way, or incomplete in this way, it makes people less likely to pay attention to the CDC.鈥� 

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.