What the Fall may look like -- the hybrid model

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good idea for what?

Kids’ education?
Kids’ socialization?
Kids’ communication skills?
Kids’ eyesight?
Kids’ exercise?
Parents’ job security?
Parents’ job productivity?
Parents’ employer existence?
National economy?
People’s compensation? (Which will easily be re-rates down further if these serious supply and demand shutdowns continue)

You're getting closer to a reasonable argument. I would have respected you more if you'd started with this rather than trying to dismiss the virus as a hoax. Here's the deal: the only way we have of controlling the virus is by limiting interpersonal contact. The virus is highly contagious, and in unrestricted populations it spreads quite quickly. In early March we were seeing spread rates where each infected person was infecting on average 2 or 3 other people, and the number of cases was doubling every 3 or 4 days. If that were left unchecked millions of people in the US would die. Through social distancing and hygiene measures we've managed to cut the spread rate to where the infection rate shrunk for a while. Now it's on to reopening, where the calculus is that we can tolerate a slightly higher spread rate in return for loosening some of the social distancing.

This is where your point comes in. OK, if we can loosen some of the social distancing, who decides which ones and how? Obviously to you getting the schools running at capacity is very important. If we have a limited number of reopening bullets to fire, shouldn't we be firing them at schools? That's a matter of opinion, there is no right or wrong answer. But where it gets interesting is the question of who makes the decision. Because the schools, and especially the private schools, aren't in a position to be deciding much at all. The health authorities are setting the guidelines, and as far as I can tell every school is going to do the absolute most they're allowed under the guidelines. It's certainly not a case of the schools not wanting to reopen fully.

So don't get mad at the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good idea for what?

Kids’ education?
Kids’ socialization?
Kids’ communication skills?
Kids’ eyesight?
Kids’ exercise?
Parents’ job security?
Parents’ job productivity?
Parents’ employer existence?
National economy?
People’s compensation? (Which will easily be re-rates down further if these serious supply and demand shutdowns continue)

You're getting closer to a reasonable argument. I would have respected you more if you'd started with this rather than trying to dismiss the virus as a hoax. Here's the deal: the only way we have of controlling the virus is by limiting interpersonal contact. The virus is highly contagious, and in unrestricted populations it spreads quite quickly. In early March we were seeing spread rates where each infected person was infecting on average 2 or 3 other people, and the number of cases was doubling every 3 or 4 days. If that were left unchecked millions of people in the US would die. Through social distancing and hygiene measures we've managed to cut the spread rate to where the infection rate shrunk for a while. Now it's on to reopening, where the calculus is that we can tolerate a slightly higher spread rate in return for loosening some of the social distancing.

This is where your point comes in. OK, if we can loosen some of the social distancing, who decides which ones and how? Obviously to you getting the schools running at capacity is very important. If we have a limited number of reopening bullets to fire, shouldn't we be firing them at schools? That's a matter of opinion, there is no right or wrong answer. But where it gets interesting is the question of who makes the decision. Because the schools, and especially the private schools, aren't in a position to be deciding much at all. The health authorities are setting the guidelines, and as far as I can tell every school is going to do the absolute most they're allowed under the guidelines. It's certainly not a case of the schools not wanting to reopen fully.

So don't get mad at the schools.

I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.

[Anonymous]

Agree, the issue is the consultants who have Bowser and Elrich (MoCo) ears. They’re way off base and creating issues other counties and states don’t have. We have family and coworkers all over the country; most Mayoral and governor talk expects the schools to be open five days a week, six hours a day, barring a significant downturn in risk or virus data or new information. they will be dropping the 10 person group rule, the 6 foot distance rule, and the indoor vs outdoor rule in a months time if they haven’t already. Schools will do their best to reconfigure anyways but they will not through in towel.

Little league already restarted in most of the south, west and Midwest. Two weeks ago.

[Anonymous]

Can we stop trying to compare the US to European countries that are less diverse, with healthier populations and that have Better healthcare coverage for their people than we do. Apples and oranges.

[Anonymous]

I think the research on super spreaders is interesting. 70% of positive people infect NO other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the research on super spreaders is interesting. 70% of positive people infect NO other people.

Slate had a story today how we shouldn't think of "super-spreaders," a better description is "super-spreading events." It doesn't seem to be person-specific so much as conditions.

https://slate.com/technology/2020/06/coronavirus-superspreaders-do-they-exist.html?via=homepage_section_features

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.

When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.

When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.

How would you usefully implement a "pervasive testing protocol"? A person who is virus-free one day could be infected the next, and daily testing seems impractical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.

When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.

How would you usefully implement a "pervasive testing protocol"? A person who is virus-free one day could be infected the next, and daily testing seems impractical.

They do it in South Korea as needed. Seems a small price to pay if you want to open things up safely.

[Anonymous]

We are hearing that it won't be one day on, one day off, but more like one week on (or even several weeks on) and then several weeks at home.

But still too early to have anything written officially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are hearing that it won't be one day on, one day off, but more like one week on (or even several weeks on) and then several weeks at home.

But still too early to have anything written officially.

Oh FFS, that’s 90% online learning, why bother. If that’s what our lower school is leaning towards we want to know ASAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no evidence of kids acting as super spreaders or even getting their family members sick!

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

So you are saying you have no evidence and are guessing. But that we should just believe you?

No, PP is saying the lack of evidence doesn’t mean that some kids aren’t super-spreaders. Don’t forget this is a very new disease.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.

When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.

Hardly any countries will have that, plus most wont actually do anything with that data. So that’s a non response. By another uber risk averse person not looking at the actual hospitalizations, deaths correlated by age or healthy comorbidity.

[Anonymous]

Luckily we will have a ton of data in two weeks time of mass gatherings result in hardly any severe covid case or Tina if them.

Use the data.

Also use the data of the Asian and EU countries who opened up and have school in session right now. And the data of the U.S. front line health workers - very low relative to other countries.

Don’t selectively only use aggregate data driven by nursing homes patients, elderly, and those with diagnosed health issues.

[Anonymous]

The DC Reopening committee is way off market on their recommendations. I wish a few large newspapers would do a story on it.
It won’t bode well for educating the children of Wash DC when they are the only jurisdiction in the country and globe that doesn’t allow gatherings over 10 people until they’re is a cure or vaccine.