In reply to ProDarwin :
I think if you read the referenced studies most of your concerns will be addressed in some way.
Here's a copy of what I posted on the last page with a couple of links to relevant international studies where kids were not in quarantine.
I am looking forward to my property taxes coming down now that the schools are going half speed(yea,right)
One of the local school districts created a video to show what the state recommendations look like:
Whether or not kids are vulnerable is a bit of a red herring.
First off, kids have been nearly completely isolated. Of course they haven't been getting it- they haven't been in school.
But more importantly, kids can carry it. They can be asymptotic carriers. They can give it to Grandma.
Young adults were thought to be low risk too. July 4th weekend- how did THAT work out?
Reopening schools while the virus is not contained (and is ramping up) is an excellent way to advance the spread rapidly among our communities.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:Whether or not kids are vulnerable is a bit of a red herring.
First off, kids have been nearly completely isolated. Of course they haven't been getting it- they haven't been in school.
But more importantly, kids can carry it. They can be asymptotic carriers. They can give it to Grandma.
Young adults were thought to be low risk too. July 4th weekend- how did THAT work out?
Reopening schools while the virus is not contained (and is ramping up) is an excellent way to advance the spread rapidly among our communities.
Well said.
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
The studies that indicate kids are low risk were done internationally, in places where schools were in session.
Contact tracing has shown that kids are far less likely to share this virus than adults. Kids were going to school, and spending nights at home with their families. In a normal situation, you'd expect the kids to take the virus to school, share it, and then continue to spread it at home, creating a hot spot. That simply isn't happening anywhere that I'm aware of.
Anti body testing has indicated that kids rarely have antibodies for this, which sounds really scary but very likely means that kids just aren't contracting this virus.
Masks and social distancing are supposed to be good enough to eliminate the spread of this virus in people with high risk profiles. If those under 18 have a lower risk of contracting the virus in the first place, a lower risk of severe symptoms, and seemingly a lower risk of transmitting the virus then shouldn't sensible precautions (masks whenever possible, fewer students per sqft, etc) be plenty?
It's interesting to me that for months, we've had people saying "listen to the experts" or "trust the science" when it comes to masks and social distancing being effective measures against this virus. Now many of the scientists and experts are saying it's probably OK to send kids back, and is likely the best choice in an imperfect situation and many of those "trust the science" people are back pedaling and second guessing everything.
In reply to STM317 :
I understand.
I realize this is anecdotal, but your study won't bring back my friend who died recently. She got it from her asymptotic granddaughter.
In reply to STM317 :
For the record, NO ONE has said masks and social distancing are supposed to be good enough to ELIMINATE the spread of this virus in people with high risk profiles.
They REDUCE the spread
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I'm sorry for the loss of your friend.
If you reduce the R0 below 1, then the virus spread is no longer expanding but contracting. Widespread masks and social distancing have successfully brought the R0 below 1 in places around the US (and the rest of the world). At that time, contact tracing and isolation become much easier and those can effectively eliminate the virus.
STM317 said:It's interesting to me that for months, we've had people saying "listen to the experts" or "trust the science" when it comes to masks and social distancing being effective measures against this virus. Now many of the scientists and experts are saying it's probably OK to send kids back, and is likely the best choice in an imperfect situation and many of those "trust the science" people are back pedaling and second guessing everything.
"Probably ok" isn't anywhere close to science. There are NO experts who know anything about how this will play out.
This is a mass politically driven social experiment with our kids at the center.
Let's talk about it in mid September.
I've never wanted more to be wrong.
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
I'd encourage you to read the international studies that I've now linked multiple times. Germany, Switzerland, China, Australia, France and others have all done school studies now. Most were performed months ago. They all come to similar conclusions. Their results are not biased toward any political agenda here in the US.
General statement, not directed at any specific poster:
If a person still wants to keep their kid home after reading those multiple studies I think that's completely ok. Do what's best for your situation and your family. But it's important to have as many facts as we can when we make choices like this. Let's use what we as a human race have learned about this specific virus rather than falling back on what we think we know about other viruses. Let's let the science guide our choice rather than simply thinking "orange man bad, so everything that gets politicized is wrong".
In reply to STM317 :
I've read them.
I've also read the actual recommendations of the task force developed by the Governor of my State, and the report from the superintendent of schools in my district.
Of the 15 or so recommendations by the state, my local schools (32,000 students) will be doing 3.
I strongly suspect many other districts are similar.
We are not similar to many other international locations.
STM317 said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
Anti body testing has indicated that kids rarely have antibodies for this, which sounds really scary but very likely means that kids just aren't contracting this virus.
I would suspect it's more likely most parents are doing a good job of protecting their kid from exposure. My niece and nephew, both under 10yrs old have tested positive for antibodies while never showing signs of illness. They shared a house with my father and brother in law so they were exposed to it twice at least early on. Many of my coworkers who have contracted it had their young children test positive as well.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to STM317 :
I understand.
I realize this is anecdotal, but your study won't bring back my friend who died recently. She got it from her asymptotic granddaughter.
More anecdotes, from rural Indiana: 2 teens just tested positive from the same small town of maybe 3k people. I don’t have the specific details yet, but it was within 5 days before or after their outdoor prom. I’m hoping that my cousins do not catch it - they’re intelligent, but also social and normal teens who wouldn’t be social distancing at prom.
Here is some non non anecdotal information out of South Korea, it is not yet published but may be peer reviewed (not clear to me): https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-1315_article
Children and teens between ages 10-19 are more likely to spread the coronavirus among family members than adults and children under 10
Certainly should give parents of middle schoolers and high schoolers pause, especially if you have high-risk folks in your circle.
I've been on the front lines fighting this bastard for 5 months.
Apparently my school superintendent has had his head in the sand, and thinks the only thing he needs to do is get a bunch of snotty nosed 6 year olds to wear masks.
In reply to STM317 :
Those studies are from countries where the people are taking this seriously and acting appropriately. Had we been able to do that instead of making it a partisan issue we'd likely be In a better position as well.
I have a bigger concern than the potential for spread. I am deeply concerned about the educational quality.
After listening to several hours of presentations by my school superintendent, it became really obvious that they are going to be CONSUMED by 1 thing... they are going to spend an inordinate amount of time teaching kids to wear masks and use sanitizer.
This is going to impact the education negatively.
I will be homeschooling my kid in the Fall because I want her to get the best education she can, and I sincerely believe homeschooling is a better option (for us).
I am NOT doing it because I am afraid she will get sick.
I think I posted this in the other thread earlier. I'm curious what the differences are between this and the conditions of the other studies:
Two weeks after Israel fully reopened schools, a COVID-19 outbreak sweeping through classrooms — including at least 130 cases at a single school — has led officials to close dozens of schools where students and staff were infected. A new policy orders any school where a virus case emerges to close.
In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
It's disappointing that four months in so many places haven't come up with workable learn at home plans. I'm watching what some friends and family are going through and the gap between really good and really bad is vast. There seems to be little sharing of what does and doesn't work between districts.
In reply to Wally (Forum Supporter) :
I completely agree.
The Spring studies were pathetic. With four months to consider it and come up with a plan, many schools have done ZERO to improve their online capabilities, and ZERO to assess their facilities and procedures.
But don't worry, Wally... they are gonna wear masks!!
There is only one reason my local schools will reopen...
If they don't, their funds will be cut.
Wally (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
It's disappointing that four months in so many places haven't come up with workable learn at home plans. I'm watching what some friends and family are going through and the gap between really good and really bad is vast. There seems to be little sharing of what does and doesn't work between districts.
1000% agree. See my post on the first page.
This has been plenty of opportunity to step up, collaborate, and improve at home learning plans. From the local school level all the way to the US secretary of education. Instead we have varying degrees of hot garbage.
They shouldn't just be sharing of what does and doesn't work. They should be sharing content, as well.
ProDarwin said:Wally (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
It's disappointing that four months in so many places haven't come up with workable learn at home plans. I'm watching what some friends and family are going through and the gap between really good and really bad is vast. There seems to be little sharing of what does and doesn't work between districts.
1000% agree. See my post on the first page.
This has been plenty of opportunity to step up, collaborate, and improve at home learning plans. From the local school level all the way to the US secretary of education. Instead we have varying degrees of hot garbage.
They shouldn't just be sharing of what does and doesn't work. They should be sharing content, as well.
Can I flounder a thread with just formatting?
Wally (Forum Supporter) said:STM317 said:In reply to SVreX (Forum Supporter) :
Anti body testing has indicated that kids rarely have antibodies for this, which sounds really scary but very likely means that kids just aren't contracting this virus.
I would suspect it's more likely most parents are doing a good job of protecting their kid from exposure. My niece and nephew, both under 10yrs old have tested positive for antibodies while never showing signs of illness. They shared a house with my father and brother in law so they were exposed to it twice at least early on. Many of my coworkers who have contracted it had their young children test positive as well.
But the antibody tests I'm referring to were done in schools on students and staff. These weren't kids that have lived in a sheltered bubble since before this started.
Parents should absolutely be cautious. They should still be reducing trips and going out in public as little as possible. They should be doing this because data indicates that kids are most likely to contract this virus from adults in their homes. Your kid is more likely to get this virus from you (collective) than they are from the snot nosed kid on the bus.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:I have a bigger concern than the potential for spread. I am deeply concerned about the educational quality.
After listening to several hours of presentations by my school superintendent, it became really obvious that they are going to be CONSUMED by 1 thing... they are going to spend an inordinate amount of time teaching kids to wear masks and use sanitizer.
This is going to impact the education negatively.
I will be homeschooling my kid in the Fall because I want her to get the best education she can, and I sincerely believe homeschooling is a better option (for us).
I am NOT doing it because I am afraid she will get sick.
This seems like a completely valid and well informed choice.
You'll need to log in to post.
