The "what if it was your kid" can be applied to almost anything. Again, we're not going to get down to zero. It's ridiculously low as it is.
I have nothing against the CDC, I'm all for people doing whatever they feel like keeps people safe. There are some serious questions as to whether masks matter with the delta variant which is more contagious. The CDC is going to take the position of "it won't hurt" as opposed to statistic bear out XYZ and that they prevent the transmission. "We're not going to tell you not to". I honestly don't think the CDC would come out and say "**** it, don't bother" even if that were true.
I basically agree with your prior posts on this. It is getting very hard to separate facts from emotions, especially when we are talking about protecting kids. Tonight on CNN, Dr Gupta was supporting school masks, and he made the point that COVID has killed 400-500 kids while H1N1 killed only 350 kids and that was considered a younger persons' infection. But, I thought....wait, given the size of the population of people under 18, these numbers are actually very close and we did not mask up schools for H1N1. So, he kind of made a poor argument. He is not a government official, but still this kind of thing does not help with the credibility of experts.
It is very hard to watch media coverage of COVID and get any information that is not hyperbolic or emotionally laden. I keep hearing words like "can get infected" and "may die" or "could possibly infect someone else". But, we already know that in a universe of possibilities "can", "may", and "could" are things with which we have to live. There is just no context when these types of words are used, and so it strikes at the credibility of the experts.
Now, to be clear, I am a big advocate of getting vaccinated and I wore my mask religiously as required by our local health officials. But, this stuff is not being communicated very well by the authorities or the media and they keep losing their audience when they step all over the message.
The best example of this is the CDC and media overreaction to and misinterpretation of the Provincetown outbreak, which has since been pretty much debunked as a useful data point for drawing conclusions about how the virus spreads.
scicheck-posts-misinterpret-cdcs-provincetown-covid-19-outbreak-report
There also seem to be serious questions about using nasal and throat swabs as a way of determining the likelihood of a vaccinated person transmitting the infection.
The point is that this data led the CDC to recommend indoor masking for vaccinated people, which in turn muddled the whole message about vaccine efficacy.