Image courtesy of Pixabay.com
The following is an opinion contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.
Over the past 18 months, scientists and physicians have analyzed medical data, experiments, and case studies to shape the best public policy to respond to COVID-19. The basic calculation has been a cost-benefit analysis: determining whether a policy’s positive impact offsets its consequences. For the most part, I believe that the experts have successfully balanced the compelling need to slow the virus’ spread with the consequences of those efforts, until now. Given the current state of COVID-19, and operating under the same cost-benefit analysis framework, Princeton’s mask-wearing policies are unjustifiable.
The problems associated with masking often go unspoken, as the practice has become politicized. That’s why many policymakers have chosen to ignore the consequences of masking. After all, masking is an “easy and simple way to protect those around you.” However, mask-wearing has undeniable consequences.
Masking degrades social connectedness, preventing many aspects of nonverbal communication. The loss of nonverbal communication is especially relevant to the over 1,000 new students in the Class of 2025 who have yet to make meaningful connections with their peers. Masks wearing will prevent them from getting to know one another and empathizing with their new classmates while stifling a sense of community.
At an academic institution where students have the opportunity to hear from some of the most famous and accomplished researchers in a given field, it’s hard to see how wearing masks would not interfere. When students can’t interpret the words of their fellow peers in seminars and conversations, it degrades the enriching experience that defines Princeton. These problems are even worse for those who have auditory disabilities. Sitting in a roomful of masked people while not being able to hear the conversation is an alienating experience.
Many would argue that masks are necessary to slow the spread of COVID-19, even if masking has consequences. Unfortunately, the data does not reflect that. Given that the delta variant is responsible for almost all COVID-19 transmission in the US, some experts are beginning to wonder how effective cloth masks even are at stopping its spread. Viral loads for the delta variant are around 1,000 times higher than the alpha variant, suggesting that cloth face masks do very little in preventing transmission, specifically concerning the delta variant. Experts note that actual protection from transmission will only be achieved through wearing N-95 respirators. Simply put, the current state of masking on campus is theater.
If we gain very little by putting on the mask, why would we undergo the costs of wearing them in the first place? That’s where the cost-benefit analysis went off the rails. A failure to analyze the actual costs and consequences of the current university mask policy means that we are left to bear the brunt of a policy that harms our institution. Princeton should reexamine the policies it has implemented, carefully considering the costs of the practices they ask us to adhere to.
Copyright © 2024 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.