Now testing is opt-out, not opt-in

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have a source on the false positive rate for these tests? Genuine question. There are lots of anecdotes like rice university, and the two “fleeting contact” people in the Australia outbreak, but is there any robust data on it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this leads to a "test and stay" policy, where instead of quarantining, kids can just get tested every day. UK found that this was equally as effective as quarantine.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-07-23-daily-contact-covid-19-testing-students-effective-controlling-transmission-schools

Have not read the whole thread yet but I would love it if this is where we are headed. I think with delta, quarantines are inevitable. But if we can weather this wave and get cases down again, I think a frequent testing/limited quarantine plan offers the best balance of safety and IPL.

A frequent testing plan would be great, but it won’t work with all these armchair experts whose children are too precious to be tested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what the new form looks like but I plan to opt out my vaccinated student. I will keep my child home if they are symptomatic and we will handle testing. There is no legit reason to do screening testing on an asymptomatic vaccinated student in a school environment where everyone has the option of getting vaccinated. And I'm not risking the possibility that a false positive will derail my child's education.

I also happen to think the "opt out" model is illegal and the school district has no business doing medical testing on my child without my consent.

They don't recommend testing vaxxed students anyway.

Even the form says it's not recommended by DOH so I'm opting my vaccinated kids out. If they have symptoms I will have them tested them independently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this leads to a "test and stay" policy, where instead of quarantining, kids can just get tested every day. UK found that this was equally as effective as quarantine.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-07-23-daily-contact-covid-19-testing-students-effective-controlling-transmission-schools

Have not read the whole thread yet but I would love it if this is where we are headed. I think with delta, quarantines are inevitable. But if we can weather this wave and get cases down again, I think a frequent testing/limited quarantine plan offers the best balance of safety and IPL.

A frequent testing plan would be great, but it won’t work with all these armchair experts whose children are too precious to be tested.

You misunderstand. Many of those who are opting out would not do so if positives were handled as described above in the UK (and Utah).

[Anonymous]

Why would anyone opt out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Testing should NOT be optional. Every one, regardless of vaccinated status, should be tested every single week during the school year, and failing that, should not be admitted to school until a negative PCR test can be provided.

Nope. That's not the policy. Many of us are opting out.

Opting out should opt you into a virtual school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this leads to a "test and stay" policy, where instead of quarantining, kids can just get tested every day. UK found that this was equally as effective as quarantine.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-07-23-daily-contact-covid-19-testing-students-effective-controlling-transmission-schools

Have not read the whole thread yet but I would love it if this is where we are headed. I think with delta, quarantines are inevitable. But if we can weather this wave and get cases down again, I think a frequent testing/limited quarantine plan offers the best balance of safety and IPL.

A frequent testing plan would be great, but it won’t work with all these armchair experts whose children are too precious to be tested.

If they refuse to get tested then they'd have to quarantine if they were a close contact. So test & stay would be an incentive to opt in.

[Anonymous]

It would be really great if the mayor and the SBOE would stop jerking the DCPS community around the week before school starts. Or in this case, the day before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be really great if the mayor and the SBOE would stop jerking the DCPS community around the week before school starts. Or in this case, the day before.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a source on the false positive rate for these tests? Genuine question. There are lots of anecdotes like rice university, and the two “fleeting contact” people in the Australia outbreak, but is there any robust data on it?

See this thread, which has links and math:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/992505.page

[Anonymous]

YAY! -- vaccinated teacher and parent of 5th and 7th (vaxxed) grader.

[Anonymous]

Yes!!! This is how it should have been at the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a source on the false positive rate for these tests? Genuine question. There are lots of anecdotes like rice university, and the two “fleeting contact” people in the Australia outbreak, but is there any robust data on it?

The rate of false positives appears low on the surface. But the problem is that when there is low community prevalence, the odds of any positive result being false go up. The math isn't immediately intuitive, but if you think about it for a second, you'll get it. Basically if the chance of covid is 1/1000, and the chance of a false positive is 1/100, then it's MUCH more likely that you have a false positive than you have covid.

Now, if the consequences of a false positive are minimal, then NBD. But the problem is that the consequences of a false positive are currently considerable, because the child and possilbly the entire class will have to quarantine.

The answer to this problem IMO is more testing. If we had a "test to stay" policy where close contacts just tested every day and didn't have to quarantine, then the primary negative consequence disappears. Similarly, a positive rapid followed by a negative PCR should allow the child to return to school immediately (assuming no symptoms consistent with covid of course). That would mean the consequences of a false positive are drastically reduced to just missing maybe 2 days of school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this leads to a "test and stay" policy, where instead of quarantining, kids can just get tested every day. UK found that this was equally as effective as quarantine.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-07-23-daily-contact-covid-19-testing-students-effective-controlling-transmission-schools

Have not read the whole thread yet but I would love it if this is where we are headed. I think with delta, quarantines are inevitable. But if we can weather this wave and get cases down again, I think a frequent testing/limited quarantine plan offers the best balance of safety and IPL.

A frequent testing plan would be great, but it won’t work with all these armchair experts whose children are too precious to be tested.

The testing is irrelevant for our child if any of the other 27-28 kids can test positive and force us into mandatory 10 day quarantine regardless of a negative test on our end. But feel free offering your own kid up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a source on the false positive rate for these tests? Genuine question. There are lots of anecdotes like rice university, and the two “fleeting contact” people in the Australia outbreak, but is there any robust data on it?

The rate of false positives appears low on the surface. But the problem is that when there is low community prevalence, the odds of any positive result being false go up. The math isn't immediately intuitive, but if you think about it for a second, you'll get it. Basically if the chance of covid is 1/1000, and the chance of a false positive is 1/100, then it's MUCH more likely that you have a false positive than you have covid.

Now, if the consequences of a false positive are minimal, then NBD. But the problem is that the consequences of a false positive are currently considerable, because the child and possilbly the entire class will have to quarantine.

The answer to this problem IMO is more testing. If we had a "test to stay" policy where close contacts just tested every day and didn't have to quarantine, then the primary negative consequence disappears. Similarly, a positive rapid followed by a negative PCR should allow the child to return to school immediately (assuming no symptoms consistent with covid of course). That would mean the consequences of a false positive are drastically reduced to just missing maybe 2 days of school.

Sorry to be clear - the ratio of false positives to actual covids goes up as the prevalence of covid declines. not the independent odds of a false positive. MATH IS HARD! Here's a more cogent explanation: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/04/19/schools-covid-testing-cost/