Best Post I’ve Seen in a Month on DL/Hybrid Choice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

So it’s your contention that the VDH is lying when they report 2300+ cases in kids 9 and under?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

So it’s your contention that the VDH is lying when they report 2300+ cases in kids 9 and under?

Those children did not give it to their parents. That's obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

So it’s your contention that the VDH is lying when they report 2300+ cases in kids 9 and under?

Those children did not give it to their parents. That's obvious.

What exactly is your argument? It changes every time you post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

So it’s your contention that the VDH is lying when they report 2300+ cases in kids 9 and under?

Those children did not give it to their parents. That's obvious.

What exactly is your argument? It changes every time you post.

My argument is - children do not catch or transmit the virus in any significant way. Schools, especially grade schools with mitigation, but probably also middle and high schools with mitigation should open. Mitigation includes limiting numbers, which the hybrid option does, as well as masks, hand washing, etc.

If it becomes clear that it is not safe, the schools will close. But I don't think there's any science that points to keeping schools virtual in areas that are not seeing upward trends, i.e. the DMV.

[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:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

So it’s your contention that the VDH is lying when they report 2300+ cases in kids 9 and under?

Those children did not give it to their parents. That's obvious.

What exactly is your argument? It changes every time you post.

My argument is - children do not catch or transmit the virus in any significant way. Schools, especially grade schools with mitigation, but probably also middle and high schools with mitigation should open. Mitigation includes limiting numbers, which the hybrid option does, as well as masks, hand washing, etc.

If it becomes clear that it is not safe, the schools will close. But I don't think there's any science that points to keeping schools virtual in areas that are not seeing upward trends, i.e. the DMV.

I dunno, 2300 sick 1-9 year olds seems significant. And please share your evidence that they didn’t give it to adults.

[Anonymous]

Can someone point me to the source where he got .0016? I’m having trouble tracking that down.

[Anonymous]

I'll leave all of you geniuses to haggle over the science and safety issues. But most people I know who are sending their kids to school are doing so for "socialization" reasons. And his point about socialization is spot on.

If you or your kids think they are going to receive anything close to a normal school day with peer interaction, it is not happening.

[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:You can't compare motor vehicle fatalities and Covid deaths from going to school because the Covid deaths occurred with most of the population under confinement, and even the population not under confinement hasn't had to deal with anything like the crowding and poor air circulation and unruly kids that you'll find in schools.
So much for the rah-rah school-at-any-cost crowd's display of "critical thinking skills."

Except evidence suggests that kids are less likely to be infected at all, meaning you can't compare exposure to school children with exposure to the population at large. You're more likely to encounter an infected person during a trip to the grocery store than in an elementary classroom.

Evidence does not suggest this. Evidence suggests they are not super spreaders. Evidence suggests that MOST (not all) children and young adults who catch it are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. If you are going to refute someone's facts, don't add false information. There have been multiple studies conducted saying that they cannot conclusively say that children do not catch and spread the virus.

So you agree that exposure to children is less risky than exposure to adults. Thanks for affirming my point.

Adults are also not super spreaders. Exposure to children has not been proven to be any less risky than exposure to adults. Adults are also not super spreaders. Events with large groups of unmasked people indoors have proven to be super spreading events. You are just are ridiculous as the people believe this guy’s post. You want to believe whatever you want to back up your preconceived idea.

We don't have a lot of data but what we have, in this country and others, shows that children do not catch or transmit the virus.

Nice of you to join us, Sec Devos.

It's called science. It may change as we learn more. But right now, we can only look at the data that we have.

So it’s your contention that the VDH is lying when they report 2300+ cases in kids 9 and under?

Those children did not give it to their parents. That's obvious.

What exactly is your argument? It changes every time you post.

My argument is - children do not catch or transmit the virus in any significant way. Schools, especially grade schools with mitigation, but probably also middle and high schools with mitigation should open. Mitigation includes limiting numbers, which the hybrid option does, as well as masks, hand washing, etc.

If it becomes clear that it is not safe, the schools will close. But I don't think there's any science that points to keeping schools virtual in areas that are not seeing upward trends, i.e. the DMV.

I dunno, 2300 sick 1-9 year olds seems significant. And please share your evidence that they didn’t give it to adults.

Sure. Is the American Association of Pediatrics an acceptable source for you?

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2020/07/08/peds.2020-004879

And you’re arguing with more than one person, BTW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I went to verify Joe Morice's LinkedIn profile and it says he works for the National Contract Management Association. Did he change that? If I Google his name with NEA it brings up a number of documents with his name. One says he's a senior procurement specialist that was paid $135,843 in 2019.

No, he is a MEMBER of the national contract management association. It very clearly said he works for the NEA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This post going viral is a beautiful case study in the way misinformation spreads. This guy, grabs the number .0016 from the internet NOT understanding it is actually .0016 PERCENT. It is 3.02 kids, not 302. And that’s assuming all 189,000 students test positive. It’s really a fatality rate of less than one kid.

As soon as I got to the 3rd paragraph I knew his math had to be wrong bc if kids are not dropping dead all over the country. I’m very disturbed how many of my friends believed this number and shared this on social media.

And if you say 1 kid dying is still too much, you better rethink leaving your house bc life is full of risks all day.

Excellent post. Can you post this as a comment to all your friends’ FB post repeating this guy? Also mention he works for NEA. I have been sitting on my hands all day but I hate FB conflict so I don’t want to post.

Thank you, I tried and a few people just posted that I was missing the whole point and there is so much more to his commentary than the number. I say his miscalculation detracts from his message but apparently I’m in the minority. The worst is he now knows of the mistake but won’t fix it. I need a social media break.

I’m not even bothering correcting people. It’s their choice and they can use whatever data or “data” they want to help them arrive at their decision, just as whatever we decide to do for our children Using whatever information we find is our choice.

Honestly if this makes people choose DL then I hope they don't notice the mistake. The less who choose hybrid the better!

My take-away is ... 3 kids. Whether his math is wrong or not, we're talking about 3 kids. That is 3 kids too many. You people are complete losers if you don't think 3 kids is worthy of more precautions.

3 kids die everyday from downing accidents. EVERY day. I bet you still take your kids swimming.

Going to the pool is a choice. Going to school is not a choice. People insisting that public schools open because those parents don't have child care is a dumb reason for 3 or more kids to die in every school.

JFC 3 kids are not going to die in every school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll leave all of you geniuses to haggle over the science and safety issues. But most people I know who are sending their kids to school are doing so for "socialization" reasons. And his point about socialization is spot on.

If you or your kids think they are going to receive anything close to a normal school day with peer interaction, it is not happening.

I am sending my kids to school for socialization reasons. It won't be like previous school years but it will be better than DL.

Some kids may have handled the isolation just fine. Mine have not. There's no real question. If the schools are open, for 2 days or 1 day or a half day, my kids will be there.