The Wisconsin Study - valid analysis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:nice dodge

I said everyone has biases, and I'm not OP. The fact still remains that no one has given a solid rebuttal to why the study is drawing conclusions by comparing a group with 88% kids to a group with probably 75%+ adults, who wouldn't be expected to get sick at the same rates, which is what the original Washington Post commenter said.

The rebuttals seem to be you're a maniac if you listen to someone commenting on the Washington Post, there are other studies that show schools are safe (that may be, but it's not relevant to analyzing this one), no one cares, we're done with schools being closed., etc.

NP. I looked at the study on the CDC page and it didn't really explain their methodology. If I could find a more detailed version, maybe I could draw better conclusions.

Whether the exact numbers used are the right or wrong ones, whether transmission in schools is lower or higher than the general public, it is clear from the numbers over time that in-person school did not increase numbers in the community. Which is the only result that really matters, ultimately.

[Anonymous]

Like I’m sorry if you can’t read the post seven comments up or several above that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

This is incorrect. With proper ventilation and air removal, schools including lunch are safe and should be open. Don't substitute your "intuition" for science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

This is incorrect. With proper ventilation and air removal, schools including lunch are safe and should be open. Don't substitute your "intuition" for science.

I haven't seen good science on this. The data I have seen was not systematically testing students or their households, was including in its numbers a bunch of kids who were actually full-time distance learning, was comparing (voluntarily reported) infection rates between a population of mostly-kids and a population of mostly-adults, etc...

Proper air removal sounds lovely, but if there is an infected kid with a cute mask gaping on all sides in front of the vent pushing freshly MERV16-filtered air into the classroom, the next kid 6 feet further with a cute mask symbolically covering their face will get a continuous forced flow of virus. If neither is tested because they're both asymptomatic, someone's parent will get sick, but they'd been doing XYZ, so that's probably how, not schools, because schools are sacred and Science!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

This is incorrect. With proper ventilation and air removal, schools including lunch are safe and should be open. Don't substitute your "intuition" for science.

I haven't seen good science on this. The data I have seen was not systematically testing students or their households, was including in its numbers a bunch of kids who were actually full-time distance learning, was comparing (voluntarily reported) infection rates between a population of mostly-kids and a population of mostly-adults, etc...

Proper air removal sounds lovely, but if there is an infected kid with a cute mask gaping on all sides in front of the vent pushing freshly MERV16-filtered air into the classroom, the next kid 6 feet further with a cute mask symbolically covering their face will get a continuous forced flow of virus. If neither is tested because they're both asymptomatic, someone's parent will get sick, but they'd been doing XYZ, so that's probably how, not schools, because schools are sacred and Science!

Yes, some children will get covid when students are in the building. But they're also getting covid while schools are closed.

Risk analysis does not mean zero risk. It means balancing multiple risks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

This is incorrect. With proper ventilation and air removal, schools including lunch are safe and should be open. Don't substitute your "intuition" for science.

I haven't seen good science on this. The data I have seen was not systematically testing students or their households, was including in its numbers a bunch of kids who were actually full-time distance learning, was comparing (voluntarily reported) infection rates between a population of mostly-kids and a population of mostly-adults, etc...

Proper air removal sounds lovely, but if there is an infected kid with a cute mask gaping on all sides in front of the vent pushing freshly MERV16-filtered air into the classroom, the next kid 6 feet further with a cute mask symbolically covering their face will get a continuous forced flow of virus. If neither is tested because they're both asymptomatic, someone's parent will get sick, but they'd been doing XYZ, so that's probably how, not schools, because schools are sacred and Science!

Yes, some children will get covid when students are in the building. But they're also getting covid while schools are closed.

Risk analysis does not mean zero risk. It means balancing multiple risks.

You're ignoring PP's point that a valid study wasn't done (that she can find). You can't balance multiple risks if the risks are improperly defined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

This is incorrect. With proper ventilation and air removal, schools including lunch are safe and should be open. Don't substitute your "intuition" for science.

I haven't seen good science on this. The data I have seen was not systematically testing students or their households, was including in its numbers a bunch of kids who were actually full-time distance learning, was comparing (voluntarily reported) infection rates between a population of mostly-kids and a population of mostly-adults, etc...

Proper air removal sounds lovely, but if there is an infected kid with a cute mask gaping on all sides in front of the vent pushing freshly MERV16-filtered air into the classroom, the next kid 6 feet further with a cute mask symbolically covering their face will get a continuous forced flow of virus. If neither is tested because they're both asymptomatic, someone's parent will get sick, but they'd been doing XYZ, so that's probably how, not schools, because schools are sacred and Science!

Yes, some children will get covid when students are in the building. But they're also getting covid while schools are closed.

Risk analysis does not mean zero risk. It means balancing multiple risks.

You're ignoring PP's point that a valid study wasn't done (that she can find). You can't balance multiple risks if the risks are improperly defined.

Before someone jumps on me... I mean you can, because there are undefined risks we take every day, but you can't say good science is backing up the risk analysis if there was not actually any good science done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one cares about your deep thoughts. Schools are finally
opening and they aren’t shutting down again.

+1

It’s hypocritical to say that “science” says it’s safe to open schools, then refuse to address the quality of the studies that the “science” relies on.

You are never going to get the Open Schools Now Neanderthals to engage you in a discussion of studies or science. They just want talking points. Of course schools are not special places where you can eat in large groups indoors and breathe the same air impervious to the virus. But they don’t care. Vaccinating teachers is essential for teachers. But doesn’t help spread among kids. They SHOULD care if they have kids over 10. They should NOT send their high schoolers into this til their kids are vaccinated. Today’s NYT survey of pediatricians has the majority saying only K-5 should open. Biden is not pushing for high schools to open. But it’s true, none of the Open Schools parents give a hoot. They think the virus goes away if they ignore it.

[Ahhh, now I get why someone in another thread accused me of calling them a Neanderthal. I couldn't decide whether they were overreacting, or whether I was projecting that much contempt in my writing.]
Agree completely with all of this.

This is incorrect. With proper ventilation and air removal, schools including lunch are safe and should be open. Don't substitute your "intuition" for science.

I haven't seen good science on this. The data I have seen was not systematically testing students or their households, was including in its numbers a bunch of kids who were actually full-time distance learning, was comparing (voluntarily reported) infection rates between a population of mostly-kids and a population of mostly-adults, etc...

Proper air removal sounds lovely, but if there is an infected kid with a cute mask gaping on all sides in front of the vent pushing freshly MERV16-filtered air into the classroom, the next kid 6 feet further with a cute mask symbolically covering their face will get a continuous forced flow of virus. If neither is tested because they're both asymptomatic, someone's parent will get sick, but they'd been doing XYZ, so that's probably how, not schools, because schools are sacred and Science!

Yes, some children will get covid when students are in the building. But they're also getting covid while schools are closed.

Risk analysis does not mean zero risk. It means balancing multiple risks.

You're ignoring PP's point that a valid study wasn't done (that she can find). You can't balance multiple risks if the risks are improperly defined.

Before someone jumps on me... I mean you can, because there are undefined risks we take every day, but you can't say good science is backing up the risk analysis if there was not actually any good science done.

Eh. She found studies but she didn't' like them. So she's decided that it's not safe.

"Good science" isn't as clean as you're saying. You look at studies, at their results and their limitations, and then you use that information. If you throw it out, as PP has done, that's her issue. No one else's.

[Anonymous]

So I got confused reading through this thread.

Did anyone refute this claim?

In the Wisconsin study, 60% more staff got infected than people in the general community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I got confused reading through this thread.

Did anyone refute this claim?

In the Wisconsin study, 60% more staff got infected than people in the general community.

That’s not convenient for them to acknowledge, so don’t count on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I got confused reading through this thread.

Did anyone refute this claim?

In the Wisconsin study, 60% more staff got infected than people in the general community.

I'm not sure. The publication on the CDC website isn't very clear. I couldn't find a better write-up of the study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VARIANTS, people. Europe was forced to close most schools despite having been opened during most of the pandemic. Why would our crowded schools be an exception?

K-4 is still open with VARIANTS at a pretty high percentage of cases. France changed a few protocols for 2 of the 3 variants but stayed open...

First sentence should say “in Denmark.”

Annnnd schools in Denmark are now reopening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I got confused reading through this thread.

Did anyone refute this claim?

In the Wisconsin study, 60% more staff got infected than people in the general community.

No, no one has refuted it, but when I said so I was told I can't read.

Staff infection rate = 8868.5/100k. Total county rate is 5466/100k, inclusive of those in and out of school, whether adults or kids. 8868.5/5466 = 1.62, which is roughly 62% higher. (This is not quite apples-to-apples, but 100% adults vs. a group that's likely 75-80+% adults is much closer to apples-to-apples than the comparison given in the study that has 88% kids in the school group.)

The study does not provide the numbers to split the non-school community members into kids and adults, but the weighted average (kids + adults) non-school rate is either 4746 (if you use 3393 total cases and 73k total county population) or 5631 (if you assume 3393 was a typo for 3993, which allows the 5466 overall rate for all people to be correct.). Either of the 4746 or 5631 has some unknown number of non-school kids*, so the non-school adult numbers would be higher, but they cannot approach 8868 when we know 5466 is the total county rate.

*We could estimate the number of virtual kids from the numbers given in the study, but they didn't mention those not yet in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I got confused reading through this thread.

Did anyone refute this claim?

In the Wisconsin study, 60% more staff got infected than people in the general community.

No, no one has refuted it, but when I said so I was told I can't read.

Staff infection rate = 8868.5/100k. Total county rate is 5466/100k, inclusive of those in and out of school, whether adults or kids. 8868.5/5466 = 1.62, which is roughly 62% higher. (This is not quite apples-to-apples, but 100% adults vs. a group that's likely 75-80+% adults is much closer to apples-to-apples than the comparison given in the study that has 88% kids in the school group.)

The study does not provide the numbers to split the non-school community members into kids and adults, but the weighted average (kids + adults) non-school rate is either 4746 (if you use 3393 total cases and 73k total county population) or 5631 (if you assume 3393 was a typo for 3993, which allows the 5466 overall rate for all people to be correct.). Either of the 4746 or 5631 has some unknown number of non-school kids*, so the non-school adult numbers would be higher, but they cannot approach 8868 when we know 5466 is the total county rate.

*We could estimate the number of virtual kids from the numbers given in the study, but they didn't mention those not yet in school.

The study compares county rates of all people, children and adults, to the school rates of children and adults, and finds that lower. You are now comparing the adult rate to the county rate and finding it higher.

Your reasoning makes less sense than the study. You've just proved that the numbers are lower in the schools than the general population, as the study found. You've proved their results.