The other thing I'd like to investigate is the cause for the reduced attendance of
younger dancers. Is it true that requiring masks is reducing the proportion of younger
dancers to the dance?
In my recent experiences of organizing dances for the past decade or so, and also
participating in many discussions on issues in social media, younger dancers have been
more insistent on safety policies at dances that ensure their safety, including having
anti-harassment policies that are well-defined and enforced. And during the pandemic, it
seems that of the people who have been more insistent in dances having good safety
policies, it has been from the younger dancers.
As an organizer during the pandemic, we have received many complaints from angry dancers.
First, before we restarted, we got many emails and FB postings from many long-time dancers
demanding we restart, even though at the time our board felt that it was not safe yet.
Later, when we decided to start under strict masking requirements, we then got dancers
insisting that we make masking optional, emails that we still get. By and large, they are
from older, long-time dancers who do not want to wear a mask.
It is true that the younger dancers have not appeared at our dances, but I don't think
it's because of masking. I can only speculate, but I think that younger dancers are
actually still very covid-aware and perhaps haven't returned to dances because covid
is still out there, and they don't feel comfortable even in masks. They would feel
even *less* comfortable without the masks, I believe.
I only speak for my area, but this is my experience.
As for the mask, if you are wearing a mask that lifts off your face on each breath,
you're really not wearing a good mask. Our dance does not allow surgical masks or
cloth masks - we only require well-fitting N95 or KN95 masks that form the tight seal on
the face when breathing both in and out. Proper adjustment of the nosepiece can prevent
glasses from fogging, and if you are wearing an N95, the straps really need to be in the
right place (one high on the head, one low on the head) in order to get the right seal. I
often see people with both straps around the neck and you do not get the correct seal that
way. So you need to wear the correct mask AND wear it properly. You don't need to
tape it to your face for any seal, and if you need to do that, you're not wearing the
correct mask.
Perry
On Wednesday, January 4, 2023 at 09:19:58 PM EST, Joe Harrington via Organizers
<organizers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I appreciate the many very thoughtful replies! I will make one more point, I think an
important one that I should have made before, and then reply to some key points.
I think that masking at contras is only effective on inhalation. In an energetic contra,
heavy breathing lifts the mask during exhalation. Much/most of the air goes out around
the mask, glasses get fogged, etc. This is inevitable unless we tape the mask down, which
I have never seen anyone do. On inhaling, we suck the masks to our faces and get a good
seal. This means that, in contra, we protect ourselves with a mask, but not others from
ourselves, even if others are protected by our own masks in other contexts. I won't
buy a partial exhalation protection from breathing into a lifted mask: 50% fewer virus
particles do not mean 50% less transmission. You're either above the threshold for a
person's immune system or you're not. Those "bypass breaths" are a lot
more volume than your sedentary breathing without a mask, and that transmits covid if
you've got it.
Yet, masks seem to work at contras. I asked the question in another thread about mask
effectiveness and it gave the answer I suspected: While events requiring vaccines and
negative tests still have rampant spread (roughly 30% of vaccinated participants at two
camps this summer got sick), NOBODY has reported spread while masking. While we have not
done before-and-after testing as in a rigorous study, we would certainly have noticed if
there were events where 30% of the attendees got covid, because so many of us know each
other at our local dances. There are lots more weekly dances than camps, yet two camps
had mass spread and no weeklies with masks have reported such. For sure, there must be
individual spread, and it would be hard to distinguish whether it came from contra or
elsewhere. But, I don't think that's important to do.
This agrees with the experience in 2021 at Florida public universities, which was a much
larger population and had more rigorous testing. We were mandated to hold classes in
person in spring 2021, before most people were vaccinated. At my campus (UCF), we had in
excess of 200,000 student visits to classrooms per week (35,000 students in face-to-face
instruction, 3 classes per student, 2 meetings per class per week; both the latter two
numbers are underestimated). We had a very strong social pressure campaign to wear masks,
and almost everyone did. We tested and traced heavily. We did not trace a single case to
classroom transmission. Conclusion: Masks work quite effectively.
My conclusion is that NO requirements at dances make the air itself safe. Vaccinated
people still spread the virus in highly infectious quantities. I claim that masked people
do, too. If we sealed our masks onto our faces with tape, we wouldn't, but nobody
does that. The safety we're getting is most likely coming from the protection we give
ourselves by wearing a mask.
Since we're not protecting others with our own masks, that means masking can be a
choice. Immunocompromised people and those who live with them can protect themselves and
their loved ones by masking (IF they also mask reliably while out in society). Those,
like me, who have had long covid and who don't wish to go through it again can mask,
and I do. Of course, there is always some risk.
Vaccination can be a choice, for the same reason. It doesn't protect one dancer from
another; it protects the vaccinated person from hospitalization. We can choose for
ourselves whether we want to risk death if we get covid. If hospital capacity is low,
requiring masks and vaccines makes sense, if society is playing along.
I'll cherry-pick some key points for response.
Now, I needed to take public transportation in the DC
area yesterday, and I would not say that it is "mostly maskless" - maybe around
50% masked, maybe fewer? Still, i am definitely seeing more masks in public places than
before the holidays. I also saw a meeting going on at my office where most in the room
were wearing masks.
This is the only argument presented that actually addressed
my main point, namely that it is total behavior and risk that count, not just behavior at
dances. If it's really the case that people in an area are masking up again, then
dances there should, too, without question.
1 in 6 immunocompromised
I don't see 1 in 6
people in society masking. It's more like 1 in 20, or even fewer. That may be
changing in some areas, at least temporarily; see above. But, a personal mask is pretty
good, though not perfect. See further above.
Under the business maxim that it's far cheaper/
easier to keep an existing customer than obtain a new one, my simplified perspective is:
what does your community want?
Many of the first respondents were Massachusetts
dance organizers whose surveys said their attendees preferred requirements. I'm in
full agreement! If your dancers want it, and you have the dancers you want, do what they
want, especially if you're also getting new dancers. But, that isn't the case in
much of the country (neither the agreement with restrictions nor the numbers dancing).
Many dances require or strongly suggest a vaccine but not a mask. This looks backward,
from the perspective of preventing transmission. Masks prevent transmission more
effectively than vaccines. Dancers can and have made their own decisions on whether to
protect themselves from hospitalization with a vaccine. I don't agree with the
non-vaxing minority, but I'd rather dance with them than alienate them.
I have to question if now, this current moment, is the
time to be asking this. .... So, knowing that last year we had a huge spike in covid in
January after the holiday gatherings, and that we are seeing a significant uptick now, my
advice is to stay the course on requiring masks until the spring and reassess then.
That's learning from experience.
I think it's a good time to be asking this, because it takes a little while to get
used to a new idea, to discuss it within our communities, and to implement change. I
suggested reconsidering, not thoughtlessly scrapping. There are good short-term reasons to
keep masking, the best one being that a community is masking outside of dancing, and thus
dancing unmasked becomes most of their risk. Two groups in the same town could fall on
opposite sides of that line, and should have different policies.
I was moved to start this thread when Don Veino asked (in another thread) whether recent
infection could be used in lieu of a vaccine. My thought is, sure, because neither one
provides much protection against infection or spread. People get reinfected within days
if it's a different strain. But then, why require vaccines at all? Vaccines
don't seem to protect anyone but the dancer, and that only from hospitalization, not
infection. I can come up with two answers: 1. To protect people from themselves, which
has the side effect of banning anti-vaxers from dancing, and 2) To make people feel safe,
even if there isn't really any added safety for you if the others are vaccinated or
not. I'd rather dance with the anti-vaxers than alienate them, even though I disagree
with them. Maybe especially because I do. We need more activities where politically
opposed people see each other as ordinary, good people, and not as the enemy. Even in
Massachusetts (where I'm from and where I dance as often as I can), behavior in
society appears to be out of line with restrictions at dances (or at least did when I was
there in mid-December), and this doesn't make medical sense to me.
If you feel it's the organization's responsibility to protect dancers from each
other, but not from themselves, and your dancers aren't demanding something different,
then strongly encouraging vaccines and masks, and requiring masks when they're common
in the region (or canceling altogether), makes sense to me. Vax required but mask
optional doesn't make sense to me, given the data from the summer camps.
--jh--
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 5:59 AM Perry Shafran <pshaf(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I have to question if now, this current moment, is the time to be asking this. If you
look at the current state of covid today, more than half our country has medium covid
community level, which is a level that combines transmission and hospitalization. That
tells me that covid is spreading and causing people to go to hospitals at a significant
amount.
Covid is still a community disease and less an individual one. Thus, it is really best
treated at the community level, where we as organizers should provide the safest possible
condition we can have to dance.
Now, I needed to take public transportation in the DC area yesterday, and I would not say
that it is "mostly maskless" - maybe around 50% masked, maybe fewer? Still, i
am definitely seeing more masks in public places than before the holidays. I also saw a
meeting going on at my office where most in the room were wearing masks.
And also consider that even if crowded, most of society is not like contra, where you are
breathing directly into everyone's faces and having them breathe directly into yours.
Thus if there is any place where universal masking is best, it's contra.
So, knowing that last year we had a huge spike in covid in January after the holiday
gatherings, and that we are seeing a significant uptick now, my advice is to stay the
course on requiring masks until the spring and reassess then. That's learning from
experience.
I empathize with those who don't want to wear a mask to dances, as I personally find
it somewhat exhausting. But I would rather not be responsible for spread of covid that
could potentially harm someone else, so I feel we need to stay the course and continue
requiring masks.
Perry
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 6:21 PM, Joe Harrington via
Organizers<organizers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: While I'm happy to comply
with any COVID policy in order to dance, and I choose to wear a mask at bigger events, I
question whether the contra communities' strict policies are doing us much good,
either in protecting us medically or in getting dances going again. Consider:
1. Even in the most restricted states (New England, etc.), nearly everyone is maskless
nearly all the time in normal life, including most dancers. People eat in very crowded
restaurants, ride public transportation, fly on airplanes, sit in airports, go shopping,
work, attend school, do sports, go to the gym, sing, interact with friends and family
members who have been out in the community maskless, etc., mostly without masks.
2. As a result of #1, covid is spreading quite effectively in our communities, even if a
few groups are still masking.
3. As a result of #2, protocols at a dance cannot much alter community spread rates, even
if the dance spread rate were zero.
But, this isn't concerning most people because:
4. Vaccines do keep nearly every infected person out of the hospital and reduce long
covid.
5. For those going to the hospital or suspected to be at risk, monoclonal and other
treatments are quite effective.
6. As a result, the mortality of covid-19 is now down to three times that of a bad flu
season, which is way down from the mass carnage of 2020.
It is questionable what anything but masking is doing for us:
7. Unmasked contra dancing, even with a vaccine and negative test, does lead to rapid
covid spread. Several camps in summer 2022 had 50+ infected dancers, even though they were
all vaccinated and all had tested negative on arrival. The incubation period and
false-negative rate are enough to allow one or two cases through, and the vaccine no
longer keeps you from getting it, it just dramatically reduces severity.
Since:
8. Even in the most conservative, vaccine-averse Southern communities, 90+% of contra
dancers at big events say they are vaccinated (per survey at Summer Contradancers Delight
Holiday in Tennessee).
9. Choosing to wear a mask remains an option for everyone, and is quite effective at
keeping the wearer healthy, though it is not foolproof (but neither is life).
And:
10. People have options for recreational and social activities, and many are choosing
those with fewer or no restrictions, especially young people who don't have much
personal risk from covid.
11. Essentially all other organized dance communities besides contra/English/etc. are
dancing without restrictions on a national level, and have been since early 2022: Square,
swing, blues, ballroom, salsa, tango, etc.
It may therefore be time for communities to reconsider absolute restrictions, and instead
encourage vaccination and mask-wearing as effective ways to stop the spread of diseases
like covid, but also the flu, RSV, and other pathogens.
People can still (and I do) choose to wear masks if they are concerned about getting
covid. The idea of reducing spread at dances would be a good one if the rest of society
were playing along. But, it isn't. When I was a teen, I boycotted China. China
didn't change.
Communities with a large component of at-risk dancers who mask in general life and who are
vaccinated may wish to continue requiring vax+mask. In areas with many dancers, two
dances, one requiring masks and one mask-optional, may make the most sense.
I am especially concerned at the reduced percentage of younger dancers I have seen at
recent events. While it seemed, prepandemic, that there was a nascent resurgence in the
popularity of contra among the current twentysomethings, few of the young dancers I used
to see are showing up to dances post-covid. When I go to swing and blues, there are lots
of younger dancers. I am certain that if we required masks at my college contra dance,
students would just go to ballroom, salsa, or swing.
If we want to get contra going again, and especially if we want to attract many new
younger dancers, who are not worried that getting covid represents a big risk to them and
who have plenty of unrestricted options in recreational activities, perhaps it's time
not to ask, "does this policy stop covid from transmitting at our dance," but
rather, "does this policy significantly lower the total covid risk our dancers
face?"
I argue that strict policies no longer do that, given our behavior in society.
Nonetheless, those of us who are concerned can still choose to reduce our own risk
substantially by being vaccinated and wearing a well-fitting KN95 or better mask whenever
we are in a crowd, including at dances, without requiring it of others. I do.
Thanks,
--jh--
Joe Harrington
Organizer, Greater Orlando Contra Dance
Faculty Advisor, Contra Knights, the UCF contra dancing club
contraknights.org
FB, Ig: Contra Knights
contradancerjoe(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list -- organizers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list -- organizers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to organizers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net