Does DCPS care? New model shows even with masks, 40% of students will still be infected with Delta

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I know Dr. Kline is talking about the number of pediatric ICU patients increasing in recent weeks in New Orleans. Certainly that is troubling. It's not evidence, though, that there is a relevant increase in virulence. It still might be evidence that covid is more transmissible (more cases x same virulence = more hospitalizations).

Here's many articles that suggest otherwise, including ones looking at delta in UK: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/990789.page

I'm having a hard time finding scientific articles in that thread.
I see NYTimes, Slate, Guardian, DW, nbc news, npr, time, fortune,
Forbes (admittedly it does discuss an AAP report that states that the last week has added 77,000 seventy-seven thousand more positive children),

BMJ is a medical journal, but the link is to an editorial form mid-June that says 'nothing to see here, most kids coming into the hospital with covid are coming i for broken bones' - contrast that with Dr. Kline's statement, or today's statement by the Surgeon General.
A lot of posters' opinions minimizing the threat, then it's kid vaccine hesitancy.
You demand a LOT of support to posters' statements (and to statements posters haven't made "prove delta is worse in kids than in adults!") but that linked thread....

Wait are you saying you are more inclined to listen to Dr. Kline's interview statements than an editorial in BMJ with citations? Having been involved in writing editorials for major journals in other disciplines, like Nature, I can tell you that they don't just let anyone write, and there is a review process.

There have been plenty of instances of prestigious medical journals publishing editorials that did not age well. This one is less than 8 weeks old, and it isn't aging well.

just because you don't like it...

No, not just because I don't like it. Just because exactly the week it was published, kids hospitalizations in the UK exploded, up and up for 6+ weeks, and have only started to come down in the past week because schools closed for the summer. Here, we are seeing cases exploding, hospitalizations rising, and we haven't opened schools yet.

1. You are still quoting Long Covid Kids
2. We need to see the data or the reports these were taken from
3. Really lacking denominators here.

Raw data from NHS that is used for these figures.
https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v2/data?areaType=nation&areaCode=E92000001&metric=newCasesBySpecimenDateAgeDemographics&format=csv

https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v2/data?areaType=nation&areaCode=E92000001&metric=cumAdmissionsByAge&format=csv

Ah completely decontextualized. I am sure that you have definitely done your own statistical analysis. You don't fool anyone by simply spitting out links that mean nothing to you.

just ignore the pp and stop arguing with them. at this point its clear they dont even know what they're citing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I know Dr. Kline is talking about the number of pediatric ICU patients increasing in recent weeks in New Orleans. Certainly that is troubling. It's not evidence, though, that there is a relevant increase in virulence. It still might be evidence that covid is more transmissible (more cases x same virulence = more hospitalizations).

Here's many articles that suggest otherwise, including ones looking at delta in UK: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/990789.page

I'm having a hard time finding scientific articles in that thread.
I see NYTimes, Slate, Guardian, DW, nbc news, npr, time, fortune,
Forbes (admittedly it does discuss an AAP report that states that the last week has added 77,000 seventy-seven thousand more positive children),

BMJ is a medical journal, but the link is to an editorial form mid-June that says 'nothing to see here, most kids coming into the hospital with covid are coming i for broken bones' - contrast that with Dr. Kline's statement, or today's statement by the Surgeon General.
A lot of posters' opinions minimizing the threat, then it's kid vaccine hesitancy.
You demand a LOT of support to posters' statements (and to statements posters haven't made "prove delta is worse in kids than in adults!") but that linked thread....

Wait are you saying you are more inclined to listen to Dr. Kline's interview statements than an editorial in BMJ with citations? Having been involved in writing editorials for major journals in other disciplines, like Nature, I can tell you that they don't just let anyone write, and there is a review process.

There have been plenty of instances of prestigious medical journals publishing editorials that did not age well. This one is less than 8 weeks old, and it isn't aging well.

just because you don't like it...

No, not just because I don't like it. Just because exactly the week it was published, kids hospitalizations in the UK exploded, up and up for 6+ weeks, and have only started to come down in the past week because schools closed for the summer. Here, we are seeing cases exploding, hospitalizations rising, and we haven't opened schools yet.

1. You are still quoting Long Covid Kids
2. We need to see the data or the reports these were taken from
3. Really lacking denominators here.

Raw data from NHS that is used for these figures.
https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v2/data?areaType=nation&areaCode=E92000001&metric=newCasesBySpecimenDateAgeDemographics&format=csv

https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v2/data?areaType=nation&areaCode=E92000001&metric=cumAdmissionsByAge&format=csv

Ah completely decontextualized. I am sure that you have definitely done your own statistical analysis. You don't fool anyone by simply spitting out links that mean nothing to you.

just ignore the pp and stop arguing with them. at this point its clear they dont even know what they're citing

I don't think they even opened the links. If so, they'd know that there's nothing we can draw on from here. It doesn't make any case without the program.

[Anonymous]

I’m amused by someone critiquing sources and then offering a Twitter thread, written by….I don’t know who is this person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m amused by someone critiquing sources and then offering a Twitter thread, written by….I don’t know who is this person?

She is confirmation bias incarnate.

[Anonymous]

A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

[Anonymous]

I think the kids are just going to get covid. 40-70% will get it. Just as the article states. It presents as a cold. So what. We got colds every other fall and life didn’t fall apart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

No. I don't care what Long Covid Kids has done with the data and posted to Twitter. Not experts. Not qualified. Not backed up by anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

you dont know what a valid source is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m amused by someone critiquing sources and then offering a Twitter thread, written by….I don’t know who is this person?

+ 1

but they have such pretty graphs and so many scary numbers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the kids are just going to get covid. 40-70% will get it. Just as the article states. It presents as a cold. So what. We got colds every other fall and life didn’t fall apart.

I know what you mean except aren’t infected hosts just more opportunities for mutations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the kids are just going to get covid. 40-70% will get it. Just as the article states. It presents as a cold. So what. We got colds every other fall and life didn’t fall apart.

I know what you mean except aren’t infected hosts just more opportunities for mutations?

Yep. So what though?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

you dont know what a valid source is

A valid source for what? For an informed, intellectually honest discussion of public health threats on an anonymous forum? It sure is. It takes some serious disingenuousness to look at that consistency shared and posted information and shrug "dunno that guy - raw data too raw - whatever."

As far as the kids hospitalized in the "flat" part of that curve, (i.e. before that BMJ article calling the curve flat mid-June before or as it shot up through the rest of June and all of July), 1 in 25 pediatric patients hospitalized between April 2020 and February 2021 developed neurological complications.
https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/uk-study-approximately-1-in-25-children-hospitalized-with-covid-19-develop-neurological-complications/
Those neurological complications were more prevalent in hospitalized kids than in adults hospitalized for covid.

Among the 1,334 children studied, researchers identified 52 cases of children who developed neurological complications, or 3.8 per cent of the study group. For adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19, current data puts the prevalence of neurological complications at only 0.9 per cent.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00193-0/fulltext

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

you dont know what a valid source is

A valid source for what? For an informed, intellectually honest discussion of public health threats on an anonymous forum? It sure is. It takes some serious disingenuousness to look at that consistency shared and posted information and shrug "dunno that guy - raw data too raw - whatever."

As far as the kids hospitalized in the "flat" part of that curve, (i.e. before that BMJ article calling the curve flat mid-June before or as it shot up through the rest of June and all of July), 1 in 25 pediatric patients hospitalized between April 2020 and February 2021 developed neurological complications.
https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/uk-study-approximately-1-in-25-children-hospitalized-with-covid-19-develop-neurological-complications/
Those neurological complications were more prevalent in hospitalized kids than in adults hospitalized for covid.

Among the 1,334 children studied, researchers identified 52 cases of children who developed neurological complications, or 3.8 per cent of the study group. For adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19, current data puts the prevalence of neurological complications at only 0.9 per cent.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00193-0/fulltext

you...criticized actual sources and then posted some garbage Twitter thread by an activist with no background and information we cannot possibly validate from the outside. you can't be a serious person. you have to be a troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

you dont know what a valid source is

A valid source for what? For an informed, intellectually honest discussion of public health threats on an anonymous forum? It sure is. It takes some serious disingenuousness to look at that consistency shared and posted information and shrug "dunno that guy - raw data too raw - whatever."

As far as the kids hospitalized in the "flat" part of that curve, (i.e. before that BMJ article calling the curve flat mid-June before or as it shot up through the rest of June and all of July), 1 in 25 pediatric patients hospitalized between April 2020 and February 2021 developed neurological complications.
https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/uk-study-approximately-1-in-25-children-hospitalized-with-covid-19-develop-neurological-complications/
Those neurological complications were more prevalent in hospitalized kids than in adults hospitalized for covid.

Among the 1,334 children studied, researchers identified 52 cases of children who developed neurological complications, or 3.8 per cent of the study group. For adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19, current data puts the prevalence of neurological complications at only 0.9 per cent.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00193-0/fulltext

Oh lord. Another journal article you didn't read. The study group is only hospitalized patients..

Have you thought about reading a single one of your sources thoroughly before citing?

Apparently not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A weekly data update in the form of graphs based on linked raw data straight from a public health data agency is a reliable source.

you dont know what a valid source is

A valid source for what? For an informed, intellectually honest discussion of public health threats on an anonymous forum? It sure is. It takes some serious disingenuousness to look at that consistency shared and posted information and shrug "dunno that guy - raw data too raw - whatever."

As far as the kids hospitalized in the "flat" part of that curve, (i.e. before that BMJ article calling the curve flat mid-June before or as it shot up through the rest of June and all of July), 1 in 25 pediatric patients hospitalized between April 2020 and February 2021 developed neurological complications.
https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/uk-study-approximately-1-in-25-children-hospitalized-with-covid-19-develop-neurological-complications/
Those neurological complications were more prevalent in hospitalized kids than in adults hospitalized for covid.

Among the 1,334 children studied, researchers identified 52 cases of children who developed neurological complications, or 3.8 per cent of the study group. For adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19, current data puts the prevalence of neurological complications at only 0.9 per cent.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00193-0/fulltext

Oh lord. Another journal article you didn't read. The study group is only hospitalized patients..

Have you thought about reading a single one of your sources thoroughly before citing?

Apparently not.

You are not having an honest conversation here.