For every 1,000 kids returning to a D.C. school, four will likely be infected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

What is far from a given is that masks will be worn at all times and correctly, and that social distancing will be even possible. You're not supposed to base public policy on everything going perfectly. Predictable misuse and failures are supposed to be factored in. It's the responsible position.

[Anonymous]

But isn't DCPS online?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But isn't DCPS online?

Yes, but a lot of people in here have their panties in a bunch about that. Including someone who wants to sue DCPS to make them open school for her kindergarten student. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

What is far from a given is that masks will be worn at all times and correctly, and that social distancing will be even possible. You're not supposed to base public policy on everything going perfectly. Predictable misuse and failures are supposed to be factored in. It's the responsible position.

Sure, but "not perfect" is not the same as no protection at all. The majority of kids will likely wear their masks as required. With that in mind, 4 kids in a thousand seems pretty low-risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China

Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.

https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

You're right. Let's run an experiment. What's the worst that could happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Why do you assume a child will diligently keep on a mask?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

You're right. Let's run an experiment. What's the worst that could happen?

Yes, let's just keep all schools closed until the coronavirus is completely gone. Who needs in-person education anyway. What's the worst that could happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Why do you assume a child will diligently keep on a mask?

Some won't, but the majority will. At only 4 infected kids per 1,000 those odds are still pretty good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China

Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.

https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html

The science doesn't cover the ES class clowns that will deliberately cough/spit/touch other kids, and say "you've got COVID" for laughs. Other kids will get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds pretty low-risk.

Are you kidding me? That’s a shit-ton.

On what planet is 0.08% a shit ton of anything?

8 per 1000 is 0.8%. It may seem like a small difference, but it is significant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China

Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.

https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html

Let's assume at a school like Wilson each kid comes in contact with 100 people each day. So a 3% transmission rate means one infected kid infects three other people. If they start with a 0.8% infection rate that's 16 kids on the first day. Then they infect 48 more and that's 64. Then those 64 infect 192 more and it's 256. If they don't shut the school it doesn't take long before everyone in the school has it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China

Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.

https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html

Let's assume at a school like Wilson each kid comes in contact with 100 people each day. So a 3% transmission rate means one infected kid infects three other people. If they start with a 0.8% infection rate that's 16 kids on the first day. Then they infect 48 more and that's 64. Then those 64 infect 192 more and it's 256. If they don't shut the school it doesn't take long before everyone in the school has it.

I think DC requires a school to temporarily close if 25-30% of the kids are out sick with a contagious disease. Basically it means even if we did open we’d probably be closing again within two weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.

Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China

Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.

https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html

Let's assume at a school like Wilson each kid comes in contact with 100 people each day. So a 3% transmission rate means one infected kid infects three other people. If they start with a 0.8% infection rate that's 16 kids on the first day. Then they infect 48 more and that's 64. Then those 64 infect 192 more and it's 256. If they don't shut the school it doesn't take long before everyone in the school has it.

Get a grip. No way does a kid have potential disease-spreading contact with 100 different kids at school at a time when schools are implementing all sorts of special practices and procedures to limit the spread of COVID.