As part of Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s stay-at-home order extension, all Illinois residents are required to wear a face mask or covering of some sort when outside their homes and social distancing isn’t possible, such as entering a business or other indoor public settings.
New guidance from the Illinois Department of Public Health notes that although the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) initially recommended healthy individuals not wear face masks, with the spread of COVID-19 through asymptomatic carriers, the CDC updated guidelines to say that everyone wear a cloth face covering when social distancing is not possible.
Everyone over the age of two will have to wear face masks, unless medically prohibited from doing so. Until recently, that was interpreted to mean that even toddlers in daycare centers should be wearing masks.
However, there exists no proof that toddlers spread the disease, and doctors are warning against babies and toddlers wearing masks, particularly under the age of two. That information led the state to change guidance on masks in daycare facilities.
On April 30, former New York Times reporter and published author Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) tweeted:
“And it seems Illinois has dropped its rule that 2-year-olds wear masks in daycare. Even Governor Lucky Sperm Club knows he can push only so far.”
Berenson attached an image of an email he received without sender information and context about where the email's origin.
The email read: “Well, it looks like the blowback was substantial enough that the state of IL offered 'clarity' to daycares this morning (well, to mine at least) and declared that the limited daycares open to essential workers will now not be considered 'public places' going forward, and so no mask requirement!”
Australia's Sydney Morning Herald reported on April 30 that there is no proof that children have passed the virus to adults.
‘’Major studies into the impact of COVID-19 on young children suggest they 'do not play a significant role' in spreading the virus and are less likely to become infected than adults. While experts insist that more evidence is needed, they note there has not been a single case of a child under 10 transmitting the virus, even in contact tracing carried out by the World Health Organisation (WHO),” wrote reporter Hayley Dixon. .
A review conducted with the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) concluded:
"COVID-19 appears to affect children less often, and with less severity, including frequent asymptomatic or subclinical infection. There is evidence of critical illness, but it is rare. The role of children in transmission is unclear, but it seems likely they do not play a significant role."
The study included a nine-year-old British boy who contracted coronavirus in the French Alps but did not infect others, despite being in contact with more than 100 other individuals. The boy also had the common cold, and influenza, which he gave to his siblings, but they did not develop the coronavirus.
Despite these results, there is no guidance yet on whether children should be in close contact with grandparents and others over the age of 70, which is the group most vulnerable to the coronavirus.
Alerts Sign-up