Last minute plan B if schools don’t open?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

It is not 1000x more transmissible. Please stop posting this misinformation over and over.

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid

This is from your referenced article. So not very comforting.

The CDC described Delta as more transmissible than the common cold and influenza, as well as the viruses that cause Ebola, smallpox, MERS, and SARS, Ebola—and called it as contagious as chickenpox in an internal document, a copy of which was obtained by and reported on in The New York Times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

It is not 1000x more transmissible. Please stop posting this misinformation over and over.

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid

This is from your referenced article. So not very comforting.

The CDC described Delta as more transmissible than the common cold and influenza, as well as the viruses that cause Ebola, smallpox, MERS, and SARS, Ebola—and called it as contagious as chickenpox in an internal document, a copy of which was obtained by and reported on in The New York Times.

I don’t find that as alarming as you would like, because it is orders of magnitude less deadly or disfiguring than any of these first four viruses.

But a nice attempt at deflection from my point that the claim that delta is “1000x more transmissable (sic)” is an outright lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

It is not 1000x more transmissible. Please stop posting this misinformation over and over.

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid

This is from your referenced article. So not very comforting.

The CDC described Delta as more transmissible than the common cold and influenza, as well as the viruses that cause Ebola, smallpox, MERS, and SARS, Ebola—and called it as contagious as chickenpox in an internal document, a copy of which was obtained by and reported on in The New York Times.

Last fall we were having our child mask outside even with their "pod", and I am thinking with delta that may be a thing for unvaccinated who don't want to catch it? I wish the CDC would let us know more how to proceed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

It is not 1000x more transmissible. Please stop posting this misinformation over and over.

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid

This is from your referenced article. So not very comforting.

The CDC described Delta as more transmissible than the common cold and influenza, as well as the viruses that cause Ebola, smallpox, MERS, and SARS, Ebola—and called it as contagious as chickenpox in an internal document, a copy of which was obtained by and reported on in The New York Times.

More contagious than smallpox, SARS and MERS? JFC. That is scarier than to say 'more contagious than Ebola", because what scares us about Ebola is the illness itself, not how contagious it is, so it's easy to mentally adjust "it's still covid, so no bleeding from eyeballs, so whatever."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cut my hours so I can teach my own child what he needs to know. He is smart but has issues with focus/attention.

Sure. Just expect a commensurate pay cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the public schools will start in person but as the weather gets colder and the cases of the delta variant increase then the schools will shut down and be virtual by the winter.
That’s why we opted for private for our kids this year.

Or.....nothing will happen and we are all flying into a panic based on last year's debacle.

Did we see this article about the UK?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/britain-covid-cases-plummet-mystery/2021/07/28/4fa3a734-ef7c-11eb-81b2-9b7061a582d8_story.html

Something strange is happening in Britain. Covid cases are plummeting instead of soaring.

They have an over 70% adult vax rate. We don't and aren't close.

Well, the proportion of DC adults who've received at least one dose is 73%. If we are comparing.

Cool story. Might be relevant if D.C. were an island and not a tourist hotspot and if travel didn't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a plan b. I didn't really have one last year, either. It is a real mark of privilege to just be able to pull a backup education and childcare option out of your back pocket at the last minute.

And that's why, if they close schools again (I mean widespread closures, not limited quarantines which I expect at this point), my Plan B is to protest the hell out of it. The only other real alternative for my family would be to move, but obviously that's not an easy proposition for us or we would have done it already. But at this point, I have less to lose by protesting and putting up a big fight than doing anything else. I already know what a year of DL means for my kid and our family, what it means for me, personally. It's not like last year when I thought I could tough it out, or I believed we were doing something important to help others (ha!). Now I know what it is.

So Plan B is showing up at Central Office every day with a megaphone until they do something about this.

LOL. OK. Have fun wasting your time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a plan b. I didn't really have one last year, either. It is a real mark of privilege to just be able to pull a backup education and childcare option out of your back pocket at the last minute.

And that's why, if they close schools again (I mean widespread closures, not limited quarantines which I expect at this point), my Plan B is to protest the hell out of it. The only other real alternative for my family would be to move, but obviously that's not an easy proposition for us or we would have done it already. But at this point, I have less to lose by protesting and putting up a big fight than doing anything else. I already know what a year of DL means for my kid and our family, what it means for me, personally. It's not like last year when I thought I could tough it out, or I believed we were doing something important to help others (ha!). Now I know what it is.

So Plan B is showing up at Central Office every day with a megaphone until they do something about this.

I’m be filing a lawsuit. Watch this space!

HAHAHAHAHA. "Watch this space, where nothing will happen, but at least I'll get to pretend I'm powerful for a fleeting moment and get that sweet rush of dopamine!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

No, but they would happily send their kids to do it so they could have "socialization."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

It is not 1000x more transmissible. Please stop posting this misinformation over and over.

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/5-things-to-know-delta-variant-covid

This is from your referenced article. So not very comforting.

The CDC described Delta as more transmissible than the common cold and influenza, as well as the viruses that cause Ebola, smallpox, MERS, and SARS, Ebola—and called it as contagious as chickenpox in an internal document, a copy of which was obtained by and reported on in The New York Times.

More contagious than smallpox, SARS and MERS? JFC. That is scarier than to say 'more contagious than Ebola", because what scares us about Ebola is the illness itself, not how contagious it is, so it's easy to mentally adjust "it's still covid, so no bleeding from eyeballs, so whatever."

Actually, the other viruses are really scary, too. Do you know what smallpox is and its fatality rate? It’s like 50%. MERS also has a CFR of 30% if remember correctly. SARS about 10%. So what you say about Ebola is also true for these viruses - they are orders of magnitude scarier than Covid is for kids. And ebola is obviously less transmissible because it doesn’t transmit through the air.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

No, but they would happily send their kids to do it so they could have "socialization."

Please note that PP‘s claim of thousandfold transmissibility is faults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

No, but they would happily send their kids to do it so they could have "socialization."

Please note that PP‘s claim of thousandfold transmissibility is faults.

*false not faults. Voice recognition

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

No, but they would happily send their kids to do it so they could have "socialization."

Please note that PP‘s claim of thousandfold transmissibility is faults.

*false not faults. Voice recognition

I'm the first quoted PP on this, and I didn't make the 1000x claim or give the Ebola classroom image.
But at this point the increased transmissibility of delta in comparison to the original covid is stated by officials to be entirely game-changing, so the number doesn't make so much of a difference - outside of the petty scorekeeping of whether falsities are shared by either 'side' of the classroom-cramming debate.

[Anonymous]

The problem isn’t sitting in a classroom for 8 hours a day with a mask. IT’S LUNCH. that’s the whopper of a problem in this plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

DP. Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that kids "magically" could not be infected, get ill, or transmit. Maybe there were some posters of that ilk here on DCUM as well, but why do you think the PP was among them? That's quite an assumption on an anonymous forum. What sane people here and elsewhere have been emphasizing all along is what you can read in the PP's follow up post - that kids are very unlikely to get severely ill (still true with delta), and less likely than adults to get infected and transmit (probably still true with delta, but maybe less so).

You do sound panicked though, so any nuance in arguments may just have gotten scrambled in your mind.

Just like a year from now you might say "Nobody except the dumbest Trumpers ever said that long-covid didn't exist in children." What many are saying on here amounts to the same thing though. They're saying that it's largely hypothetical, and so rare it should be irrelevant to parenting decisions and policy decisions.

You can speculate all you want about what I or some other anonymous poster might say a year from now. Your assumptions change nothing about the veracity of my post.

LOL. Somebody just said it one thread over.

"It'd be a lot better and easier to just mandate the vaccine for public employees. We have to start getting back to normal. Kid to kid transmission is very unlikely." Only the dumbest of Trumpers, eh? Even I didn't think people believed that 'ish in 2021. I was reeling about when they said it in 2020.

I didn't post that comment, but in 2020, kid to kid transmission in schools, especially when masks were worn but even without, has proved to be indeed very unlikely. When there have been cases in schools and close contacts were tested, here and abroad, these cases usually proved to be isolated.

It remains to be seen to what extent that changes with delta.

Could we do the math now? It is 1000x more transmissable and lives in the nose (which kids like to pick). They said it's more contagious than ebola. Would you sit in a closed classroom with 20 cloth-masked children who might have ebola for 8 hours a day?

No, but they would happily send their kids to do it so they could have "socialization."

Please note that PP‘s claim of thousandfold transmissibility is faults.

*false not faults. Voice recognition

I'm the first quoted PP on this, and I didn't make the 1000x claim or give the Ebola classroom image.
But at this point the increased transmissibility of delta in comparison to the original covid is stated by officials to be entirely game-changing, so the number doesn't make so much of a difference - outside of the petty scorekeeping of whether falsities are shared by either 'side' of the classroom-cramming debate.

1000x transmissibility vs the actual 50% higher transmissibility makes a huge difference and pointing it out is not petty.