CSNbbs

Full Version: OT- Corona Virus- Where do we go from here?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Can we talk more about schools? Generally speaking, children are not at any severe risk with COVID. Globally, there is very little evidence that children are spreaders of COVID.

In the US, we have 70+ million kids under 18. We have around 70,000 positive cases of COVID. We have approximately 2,000 hospitalizations.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/m...tm#T1_down

Why can't we reopen schools?

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/back-school-t...ols-reopen
(06-24-2020 07:18 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]Can we talk more about schools? Generally speaking, children are not at any severe risk with COVID. Globally, there is very little evidence that children are spreaders of COVID.

In the US, we have 70+ million kids under 18. We have around 70,000 positive cases of COVID. We have approximately 2,000 hospitalizations.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/m...tm#T1_down

Why can't we reopen schools?

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/back-school-t...ols-reopen

But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.
(06-24-2020 07:18 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]Can we talk more about schools? Generally speaking, children are not at any severe risk with COVID. Globally, there is very little evidence that children are spreaders of COVID.

In the US, we have 70+ million kids under 18. We have around 70,000 positive cases of COVID. We have approximately 2,000 hospitalizations.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/m...tm#T1_down

Why can't we reopen schools?

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/back-school-t...ols-reopen

It's clear that generally children don't exhibit as strong of symptoms as adults, though not in all cases. The question is whether they can act as carriers still. Some observations say that they don't spread it as easily as adults but there's not been any widescale studies done so we don't know. If it is the case then this virus would be the exception to other respiratory infections. And FWIW most schools that they are looking at have been modified in ways similar to how Virginia plans to. Sweden would have been the place to look but they didn't collect the data and are now on summer break.
I just spoke with a librarian-acquaintance. I mentioned that she must be looking forward to getting back to work, after being stuck at home for 12 weeks. She disappointed me (although I tried to keep it to myself) in responding that she cannot believe that she is to be exposed to this increased threat to her own health. Far from looking forward to getting back to work, she fears it.

I don't know her all that well, and am not qualified to judge her sincerity. But it did cross my mind that her concerns are less about her legitimate fear and more about extending indefinitely this fully paid leave of absence that she, as a public-sector, non-essential employee, has been enjoying for the past 12 months. Is that unfair on my part? Perhaps. But it is no less unfair than the persistent suggestions from our lockdown cheerleaders, who have an insatiable habit of accusing anyone who questions the wisdom of our response to this virus as being selfish and uncaring.

Kids need school. Young adults need summer jobs. Elderly adults need to be able to see their families. Private employers need to be able to generate revenues in order to pay their employees. After 12 weeks of dithering leadership, asking for all of that to be provided now is not selfish or uncaring.
(06-24-2020 08:07 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.

I don't think we know for sure whether adults can get the virus from kids. Its seems at best, there is a low chance. What about adults to adults?
(06-24-2020 11:27 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 08:07 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.

I don't think we know for sure whether adults can get the virus from kids. Its seems at best, there is a low chance. What about adults to adults?

Obviously, adults to adults is the concern. But, it would seem to me, that’s also a lot easier to manage. Stay home if sick. Don’t congregate in the break room. Wear masks during staff meetings. Practice social distancing. Basically, act like every other place of employment right now.

Sounds like we’re in agreement, now. Let’s open the schools.
(06-24-2020 11:27 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 08:07 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.

I don't think we know for sure whether adults can get the virus from kids. Its seems at best, there is a low chance. What about adults to adults?

If it is adult to adult you are worried about, what makes teachers more sacred than the millions of other people in the US that are expected to go to work every day? Why are teachers not considered essential. They get a pass while all the other essential employees are required to go to work and, in your opinion, put themselves at serious risk?
(06-24-2020 11:37 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 11:27 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 08:07 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.

I don't think we know for sure whether adults can get the virus from kids. Its seems at best, there is a low chance. What about adults to adults?

Obviously, adults to adults is the concern. But, it would seem to me, that’s also a lot easier to manage. Stay home if sick. Don’t congregate in the break room. Wear masks during staff meetings. Practice social distancing. Basically, act like every other place of employment right now.

Sounds like we’re in agreement, now. Let’s open the schools.


No, kids spreading it amongst each other and to teachers and bringing it home is the concern. If we knew for sure that there was a reduced risk of infected children spreading the disease despite having no or mild symptoms then we would feel a lot better about things but we don't. And still there would need to be social distancing (good luck with that Kindergarten teachers). So basically what we'e doing.
(06-24-2020 12:17 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]No, kids spreading it amongst each other and to teachers and bringing it home is the concern. If we knew for sure that there was a reduced risk of infected children spreading the disease despite having no or mild symptoms then we would feel a lot better about things but we don't. And still there would need to be social distancing (good luck with that Kindergarten teachers). So basically what we'e doing.

There is no evidence that kids are spreading it. What does it mean to know "for sure"? We probably won't know anything "for sure" for 2 years, when we just might have enough data to come to real conclusions. Right now, we have to take the best information available to us, and that is, nowhere in the entire world does there seem to be examples of outbreaks that center around schools. So, it would seem, the best information would be that kids don't spread the virus. Why should the default position be, lock these kids in their homes, when there is no data to back that up?
(06-24-2020 12:24 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 12:17 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]No, kids spreading it amongst each other and to teachers and bringing it home is the concern. If we knew for sure that there was a reduced risk of infected children spreading the disease despite having no or mild symptoms then we would feel a lot better about things but we don't. And still there would need to be social distancing (good luck with that Kindergarten teachers). So basically what we'e doing.

There is no evidence that kids are spreading it. What does it mean to know "for sure"? We probably won't know anything "for sure" for 2 years, when we just might have enough data to come to real conclusions. Right now, we have to take the best information available to us, and that is, nowhere in the entire world does there seem to be examples of outbreaks that center around schools. So, it would seem, the best information would be that kids don't spread the virus. Why should the default position be, lock these kids in their homes, when there is no data to back that up?

Kids are absolutely spreading it. There's no question about it. Documented and verified. The question is if they spread it at the same rate as adults or at a lower rate. There are very few places in the world that we can look because everywhere minus Sweden because almost everywhere where schools have returned have been modified and if they're not testing the kids they don't know if they are the source of the cluster because they're typically not exhibiting symptoms. With pretty much every other respiratory disease known to man the answer would be, yes of course kids can spread the disease. In fact they're more likely to spread it because you can't get them to social distance and they use the back of their hands as tissues. So without evidence otherwise you want to assume that this virus is the exception and put the most effective germ spreading institution into full swing? And yes there have been cases of clusters in schools but typically amongst the teachers, the kids aren't getting tested.
(06-24-2020 12:44 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]Kids are absolutely spreading it. There's no question about it. Documented and verified. The question is if they spread it at the same rate as adults or at a lower rate. There are very few places in the world that we can look because everywhere minus Sweden because almost everywhere where schools have returned have been modified and if they're not testing the kids they don't know if they are the source of the cluster because they're typically not exhibiting symptoms. With pretty much every other respiratory disease known to man the answer would be, yes of course kids can spread the disease. In fact they're more likely to spread it because you can't get them to social distance and they use the back of their hands as tissues. So without evidence otherwise you want to assume that this virus is the exception and put the most effective germ spreading institution into full swing? And yes there have been cases of clusters in schools but typically amongst the teachers, the kids aren't getting tested.

You stating it on a message board neither documents it nor verifies. At best, the science is inconclusive. To state otherwise is simply letting your feelings take the place of the science.

This study "ooked at staff and students at five primary schools and 10 high schools from March to mid-April found that, out of 863 people who were in close contact with someone with Covid-19, only two, or 0.23%, contracted the new coronavirus. The researchers concluded that transmission of the coronavirus "in children in schools appears considerably less than seen for other respiratory viruses, such as influenza."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ocument/p1

This study followed one pediatric case who visited 3 different schools while symptomatic. Seven days after the first cases were diagnosed, 1 tertiary case was detected in a symptomatic patient with from the chalet ) he had stayed in chalet at some point) a positive endotracheal aspirate; all previous and concurrent nasopharyngeal specimens were negative. Additionally, 172 contacts were monitored; all contacts tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N = 73) were negative.

One health expert in Britain has said, there's "only one documented [Covid-19] outbreak associated with a school." He said, "[Y]ou would normally expect most of the outbreaks to be associated with schools but yet in global literature there is only one documented study. … It is pretty remarkable."

We've been told all along this is a "novel virus" so it's different than the rest. (That was the rationale to try to convince us it was going to have a 3% death rate). Maybe this is one of the differences?
(06-24-2020 01:05 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 12:44 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]Kids are absolutely spreading it. There's no question about it. Documented and verified. The question is if they spread it at the same rate as adults or at a lower rate. There are very few places in the world that we can look because everywhere minus Sweden because almost everywhere where schools have returned have been modified and if they're not testing the kids they don't know if they are the source of the cluster because they're typically not exhibiting symptoms. With pretty much every other respiratory disease known to man the answer would be, yes of course kids can spread the disease. In fact they're more likely to spread it because you can't get them to social distance and they use the back of their hands as tissues. So without evidence otherwise you want to assume that this virus is the exception and put the most effective germ spreading institution into full swing? And yes there have been cases of clusters in schools but typically amongst the teachers, the kids aren't getting tested.

You stating it on a message board neither documents it nor verifies. At best, the science is inconclusive. To state otherwise is simply letting your feelings take the place of the science.

This study "ooked at staff and students at five primary schools and 10 high schools from March to mid-April found that, out of 863 people who were in close contact with someone with Covid-19, only two, or 0.23%, contracted the new coronavirus. The researchers concluded that transmission of the coronavirus "in children in schools appears considerably less than seen for other respiratory viruses, such as influenza."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ocument/p1

This study followed one pediatric case who visited 3 different schools while symptomatic. Seven days after the first cases were diagnosed, 1 tertiary case was detected in a symptomatic patient with from the chalet ) he had stayed in chalet at some point) a positive endotracheal aspirate; all previous and concurrent nasopharyngeal specimens were negative. Additionally, 172 contacts were monitored; all contacts tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N = 73) were negative.

One health expert in Britain has said, there's "only one documented [Covid-19] outbreak associated with a school." He said, "[Y]ou would normally expect most of the outbreaks to be associated with schools but yet in global literature there is only one documented study. … It is pretty remarkable."

We've been told all along this is a "novel virus" so it's different than the rest. (That was the rationale to try to convince us it was going to have a 3% death rate). Maybe this is one of the differences?

Yes and maybe the difference is in 15 years all these kids that are asymptomatic will develop organ failure.
(06-24-2020 01:10 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 01:05 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 12:44 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]Kids are absolutely spreading it. There's no question about it. Documented and verified. The question is if they spread it at the same rate as adults or at a lower rate. There are very few places in the world that we can look because everywhere minus Sweden because almost everywhere where schools have returned have been modified and if they're not testing the kids they don't know if they are the source of the cluster because they're typically not exhibiting symptoms. With pretty much every other respiratory disease known to man the answer would be, yes of course kids can spread the disease. In fact they're more likely to spread it because you can't get them to social distance and they use the back of their hands as tissues. So without evidence otherwise you want to assume that this virus is the exception and put the most effective germ spreading institution into full swing? And yes there have been cases of clusters in schools but typically amongst the teachers, the kids aren't getting tested.

You stating it on a message board neither documents it nor verifies. At best, the science is inconclusive. To state otherwise is simply letting your feelings take the place of the science.

This study "ooked at staff and students at five primary schools and 10 high schools from March to mid-April found that, out of 863 people who were in close contact with someone with Covid-19, only two, or 0.23%, contracted the new coronavirus. The researchers concluded that transmission of the coronavirus "in children in schools appears considerably less than seen for other respiratory viruses, such as influenza."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ocument/p1

This study followed one pediatric case who visited 3 different schools while symptomatic. Seven days after the first cases were diagnosed, 1 tertiary case was detected in a symptomatic patient with from the chalet ) he had stayed in chalet at some point) a positive endotracheal aspirate; all previous and concurrent nasopharyngeal specimens were negative. Additionally, 172 contacts were monitored; all contacts tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N = 73) were negative.

One health expert in Britain has said, there's "only one documented [Covid-19] outbreak associated with a school." He said, "[Y]ou would normally expect most of the outbreaks to be associated with schools but yet in global literature there is only one documented study. … It is pretty remarkable."

We've been told all along this is a "novel virus" so it's different than the rest. (That was the rationale to try to convince us it was going to have a 3% death rate). Maybe this is one of the differences?

Yes and maybe the difference is in 15 years all these kids that are asymptomatic will develop organ failure.

What?????????????????????? Are you just making stuff up now? Stay away from Alex Jones, or whoever the left wing version of Alex Jones is.... Rachel Madow? Stay away from her.
(06-24-2020 01:28 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 01:10 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 01:05 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 12:44 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]Kids are absolutely spreading it. There's no question about it. Documented and verified. The question is if they spread it at the same rate as adults or at a lower rate. There are very few places in the world that we can look because everywhere minus Sweden because almost everywhere where schools have returned have been modified and if they're not testing the kids they don't know if they are the source of the cluster because they're typically not exhibiting symptoms. With pretty much every other respiratory disease known to man the answer would be, yes of course kids can spread the disease. In fact they're more likely to spread it because you can't get them to social distance and they use the back of their hands as tissues. So without evidence otherwise you want to assume that this virus is the exception and put the most effective germ spreading institution into full swing? And yes there have been cases of clusters in schools but typically amongst the teachers, the kids aren't getting tested.

You stating it on a message board neither documents it nor verifies. At best, the science is inconclusive. To state otherwise is simply letting your feelings take the place of the science.

This study "ooked at staff and students at five primary schools and 10 high schools from March to mid-April found that, out of 863 people who were in close contact with someone with Covid-19, only two, or 0.23%, contracted the new coronavirus. The researchers concluded that transmission of the coronavirus "in children in schools appears considerably less than seen for other respiratory viruses, such as influenza."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ocument/p1

This study followed one pediatric case who visited 3 different schools while symptomatic. Seven days after the first cases were diagnosed, 1 tertiary case was detected in a symptomatic patient with from the chalet ) he had stayed in chalet at some point) a positive endotracheal aspirate; all previous and concurrent nasopharyngeal specimens were negative. Additionally, 172 contacts were monitored; all contacts tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N = 73) were negative.

One health expert in Britain has said, there's "only one documented [Covid-19] outbreak associated with a school." He said, "[Y]ou would normally expect most of the outbreaks to be associated with schools but yet in global literature there is only one documented study. … It is pretty remarkable."

We've been told all along this is a "novel virus" so it's different than the rest. (That was the rationale to try to convince us it was going to have a 3% death rate). Maybe this is one of the differences?

Yes and maybe the difference is in 15 years all these kids that are asymptomatic will develop organ failure.

What?????????????????????? Are you just making stuff up now? Stay away from Alex Jones, or whoever the left wing version of Alex Jones is.... Rachel Madow? Stay away from her.

Yeah, I just made that up. We don't know anything about this virus, I'm glad that it's not affecting children at this time but I'm not ready to be as cavalier about it as you two. 6 months it's been affecting humans. Herpes virus, stays in your body for life can reappear. Chicken Pox Virus, stays in your body for life and can reappear. So what I described is not unheard of. Covid 19 attacks the ACE2 receptor in certain cells. These receptors are prevalent in the lungs but are found in many other cells throughout your body. We've seen people die of heart attacks & strokes. There's growing evidence that it can leave lasting damage on your lungs, heart, kidneys, can give you diabetes where before you were perfectly healthy. This is a strange virus and I think the fall will be worse than the spring.
I think the jury is still out. That being said, and given the many as yet unknowns about the virus, it seems prudent to err on the side of caution....



Quote:Children represent a small fraction of confirmed COVID-19 cases — less than 2% of reported infections in China, Italy and the United States have been in people under 18 years old.

Quote:... researchers are divided on whether children are less likely than adults to get infected and to spread the virus. Some say that a growing body of evidence suggests children are at lower risk. They are not responsible for the majority of transmission....


Quote:Other scientists argue against a rushed return to classrooms. They say the incidence of infection in children is lower than in adults partly because they haven’t been exposed to the virus as much — especially with many schools closed. And children are not getting tested as often as adults, because they tend to have mild or no symptoms.....

Quote:I do not see any strong biological or epidemiological reason to believe that children don’t get as infected


https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01354-0
(06-24-2020 12:11 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 11:27 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 08:07 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.

I don't think we know for sure whether adults can get the virus from kids. Its seems at best, there is a low chance. What about adults to adults?

If it is adult to adult you are worried about, what makes teachers more sacred than the millions of other people in the US that are expected to go to work every day? Why are teachers not considered essential. They get a pass while all the other essential employees are required to go to work and, in your opinion, put themselves at serious risk?

I don't understand. Do you think I believe others should be going to work every day?
(06-24-2020 12:24 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 12:17 PM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]No, kids spreading it amongst each other and to teachers and bringing it home is the concern. If we knew for sure that there was a reduced risk of infected children spreading the disease despite having no or mild symptoms then we would feel a lot better about things but we don't. And still there would need to be social distancing (good luck with that Kindergarten teachers). So basically what we'e doing.

There is no evidence that kids are spreading it. What does it mean to know "for sure"? We probably won't know anything "for sure" for 2 years, when we just might have enough data to come to real conclusions. Right now, we have to take the best information available to us, and that is, nowhere in the entire world does there seem to be examples of outbreaks that center around schools. So, it would seem, the best information would be that kids don't spread the virus. Why should the default position be, lock these kids in their homes, when there is no data to back that up?

To address your last question, the default should be the safer position if the issue is at question. What would happen, for example, if 1 month into the school year we find out that kids spread to other kids and/or adults; or we find out that kids exposed to the coronavirus have reduced lung capacity (seems plausible). Someone saying we went by what the best information available to us would be of little solace to myself. OTOH, if 1 month in we find out that kids are of not threat, the downside is they spent 1 month doing schoolwork from home.

Never will I understand the viewpoint that the default position should be open things up with all the data we have up to this point on this very serious virus.
This is an interesting article that puts things into perspective.

https://townhall.com/columnists/philkerp...e-n2571160

It is crazy to me that there are still a ton of people who don't admit that we would have been much better off if the focus of our Governors was on LTCs rather than locking down every healthy person in the state, while forcing COVID positive seniors into LTCs where they infected the entire facility. 55% is a huge number, 70,000 to be precise, and the fact that the 7 states that enacted this policy account for 60% (77,000) of deaths should absolutely outrage everyone with a heart, and yet for some reason nobody seems to care all that much. People are more concerned with a handful of college football players testing positive than the fact that vast numbers of our most vulnerable were killed by the horrendous policies of people in power, some of whom are lauded as some sort of COVID saint. Its appalling really.
(06-24-2020 01:56 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 12:11 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 11:27 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 08:07 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-24-2020 07:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, someone has to teach the kids. People keep focusing on the survival rate of children but you have to think about teachers and all the school employees.


Is there any reason to believe this adults are getting the virus from the kids? If not, they aren't really at any greater risk than anyone else? In fact, they might be at far less risk than, say, the guys at the shipyard.

I don't think we know for sure whether adults can get the virus from kids. Its seems at best, there is a low chance. What about adults to adults?

If it is adult to adult you are worried about, what makes teachers more sacred than the millions of other people in the US that are expected to go to work every day? Why are teachers not considered essential. They get a pass while all the other essential employees are required to go to work and, in your opinion, put themselves at serious risk?

I don't understand. Do you think I believe others should be going to work every day?

Do you think essential workers should be working?
Reference URL's