MoCo Childcare Forum Thread

[Anonymous]

I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

[Anonymous]

Agree that was really irritating. Also how is a 4 YO different from an unvaccinated 5 YO?

I am happy to hear they will allow rest to stay.

[Anonymous]

you are exhausting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree that was really irritating. Also how is a 4 YO different from an unvaccinated 5 YO?

I am happy to hear they will allow rest to stay.

Yes it sounds like under 5 can return after 5 days with a negative test. Then we will all have cave to the under 5 vaccines to get no quarantines. So there is hope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:you are exhausting.

No many parental are exhausted. If you have nothing to contribute to this serious issue buzz off this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree that was really irritating. Also how is a 4 YO different from an unvaccinated 5 YO?

I am happy to hear they will allow rest to stay.

Well, a 4 year doesn't have the choice to be vaccinated, the 5 yo does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that was really irritating. Also how is a 4 YO different from an unvaccinated 5 YO?

I am happy to hear they will allow rest to stay.

Well, a 4 year doesn't have the choice to be vaccinated, the 5 yo does.

The morality is incredibly different. But I have trouble believing they are medically very different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

Yeah, what is the end game? How long are they going to be overly worried about vaccinated/boosted adults? When a higher authority declares it as endemic rather than pandemic? I really want to know how long we are going to continue to ask kids to sacrifice for adults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

Yeah, what is the end game? How long are they going to be overly worried about vaccinated/boosted adults? When a higher authority declares it as endemic rather than pandemic? I really want to know how long we are going to continue to ask kids to sacrifice for adults.

That logic is bizarre though because wouldn’t that apply to older grades and students who are around adults? The whole thing is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

Yeah, what is the end game? How long are they going to be overly worried about vaccinated/boosted adults? When a higher authority declares it as endemic rather than pandemic? I really want to know how long we are going to continue to ask kids to sacrifice for adults.

That logic is bizarre though because wouldn’t that apply to older grades and students who are around adults? The whole thing is ridiculous.

Probably because they can be vaccinated, but I don't think I've ever seen any numbers on the likelihood of spreading the virus broken out by age and vaccination status. Like is an unvaccinated 2yo really any more likely to spread it than a 18yo vaccinated person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

Yeah, what is the end game? How long are they going to be overly worried about vaccinated/boosted adults? When a higher authority declares it as endemic rather than pandemic? I really want to know how long we are going to continue to ask kids to sacrifice for adults.

That logic is bizarre though because wouldn’t that apply to older grades and students who are around adults? The whole thing is ridiculous.

Probably because they can be vaccinated, but I don't think I've ever seen any numbers on the likelihood of spreading the virus broken out by age and vaccination status. Like is an unvaccinated 2yo really any more likely to spread it than a 18yo vaccinated person?

Yeah I haven’t seen it either so I don’t know either way but it just doesn’t seem like it’s based in much. It seems like they are just stalling until the fax is available for under 5s. It’s depressing to see the authorities are so paralyzed over this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

So once again kids are paying run price in this pandemic. I’m so sick of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that was really irritating. Also how is a 4 YO different from an unvaccinated 5 YO?

I am happy to hear they will allow rest to stay.

Well, a 4 year doesn't have the choice to be vaccinated, the 5 yo does.

Except for the question is how a 4 YO is different from an unvaccinated 5 YO, not a vaccinated 5 YO. Of course vaccinated kids are different. But this guidance treats a 4 YO differently from an unvaccinated kid ages 5+

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am listening to it now. They are setting up to get you to accept stricter guidelines. I'm shocked at how many times someone has said "children under 5 are at the greatest risk." Someone should ask them exactly how. Also, why are the two healthcare officers psychologists? A Psy.D. and Ph.D. in Family Science. These are the health officers of MoCo making decisions about a virus? WTF?

Bridgers and Stoddard later clarified kids aren’t actually at significant risk. They're worried about transmissions from the kids to adults, except that those adults can be vaccinated/boosted.

Yeah, what is the end game? How long are they going to be overly worried about vaccinated/boosted adults? When a higher authority declares it as endemic rather than pandemic? I really want to know how long we are going to continue to ask kids to sacrifice for adults.

Kids are getting very sick to. We all need to sacrifice for each other. Sadly that is impossible for you and you’d rather complain.