All schools should offer an all-virtual option

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so no, you aren't going to engage with the research.

I’m not even the original person that you were arguing with, but I did post the quote about 7-11 year old children from the article and asked to get back on topic. Alas, I’ve quickly realized this is a pointless discussion.

we I was talking to someone else then.

But yeah, this convo is pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so no, you aren't going to engage with the research.

I’m not even the original person that you were arguing with, but I did post the quote about 7-11 year old children from the article and asked to get back on topic. Alas, I’ve quickly realized this is a pointless discussion.

NP. It’s certainly pointless if you stick with your erroneous assumption that the article was speaking about 7-11 year olds, and not in fact about GRADES 7-11. Do you never bother to read footnotes?

[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:For funsies, another one:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/12/kids-likely-not-driving-household-covid-19-outbreaks

"A study in Clinical Infectious Diseases yesterday shows that children are unlikely to be the source of COVID-19 household outbreaks and are less likely to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 by another household member, with implications for vaccine distribution."



And yes, that and all of these studies are pre-delta. But aside from delta being more transmissible overall (for adults and children) it hasn't been shown that delta causes kids to be WAY MORE infectious (than adults).

Good for you that you're enjoying your funsies, but they are not relevant to the current situation.
The Director of the NIH has said that delta behaves so differently from the original covid that we needed to brush aside what we had learned.

Even if I took you at your word that we have absolutely no studies and no information relevant to the situation at hand, that wouldn't mean that I need to accept your unsupported histrionics as fact. By definition, you have no evidence to support your claims.

This is exactly correct. If the prior poster says there are no studies of any bearing, s/he has nothing to support any of his/her claims.

Transmission higher with Delta amongst children in UK schools. I mean you aren’t going to have peer-reviewed studies on something that is happening in real-time.

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1445

Based on the reports out of multiple pediatric hospitals, it probably makes sense to prepare here in the meantime.

Yes, the fact that delta is more transmissible is not in question.

Yet, what is in question by our two virtual-hating trolls here, apparently, is "that delta causes kids to be WAY MORE infectious (than adults)."

Well, nothing in your article says that kids with delta are more transmissible than adults with delta. That is still a question, and so far there is no evidence that delta in kids is MORE transmissible than delta in adults.

LOL, you're so comically bad at brain. Oh, I feel bad for saying this.

I'm going to try one more time. What are you hoping to show with the BMJ article? The article says that there is spread in schools. What do you want us to see?

That we should have a virtual option. Seems pretty clear.

It specifically says secondary schools, ie: teenagers, by the way. Teenagers in the US are eligible for the vaccines. They are not in the UK.

Good catch!

“Latest data from the Office for National Statistics for the week to 29 May show that numbers of cases of covid-19 have been rising fastest in schoolchildren in years 7 to 11.3 Data from Public Health England show that the number of outbreaks involving variants managed by health protection teams in educational settings have been rising for some weeks and trebled in the last two weeks of May.4 In the week to 1 June health protection teams managed more outbreaks in educational settings than in any other defined setting, and the vast majority of outbreaks involved the delta variant”.

But again what is the plan with quarantined students. Trying to get back on topic.

School year 7-11 means teenagers, ie: Grade 7-11.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so no, you aren't going to engage with the research.

I’m not even the original person that you were arguing with, but I did post the quote about 7-11 year old children from the article and asked to get back on topic. Alas, I’ve quickly realized this is a pointless discussion.

Gotcha just noticed that. Either way, I’m still not sure of the point of your argument. You two can continue now.

As long as we have stopped you from posting unsubstantiated histrionics for the moment I feel like my work is done.

[Anonymous]

If I'm reading this correctly, that article about spread in teenagers in the UK is not pertinent to the US, since in the US that age group can be vaccinated, and it cannot in the UK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so no, you aren't going to engage with the research.

I’m not even the original person that you were arguing with, but I did post the quote about 7-11 year old children from the article and asked to get back on topic. Alas, I’ve quickly realized this is a pointless discussion.

Gotcha just noticed that. Either way, I’m still not sure of the point of your argument. You two can continue now.

As long as we have stopped you from posting unsubstantiated histrionics for the moment I feel like my work is done.

Wrong person tiger.

[Anonymous]

I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

Dr. Mark Kline Physician-in-Chief at Children's Hospital New Orleans, 4th down in the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

Good luck. They won’t even explain what they would like to see for quarantined students, let alone those who want a full-time virtual public option.

I’m currently planning on sending my child (under 12) in-person, but I can legitimately see why some people do not want to when vaccines are a few months away. The cases above are terrible and we won’t know about any long-term damage for quite some time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

Good luck. They won’t even explain what they would like to see for quarantined students, let alone those who want a full-time virtual public option.

I’m currently planning on sending my child (under 12) in-person, but I can legitimately see why some people do not want to when vaccines are a few months away. The cases above are terrible and we won’t know about any long-term damage for quite some time.

As I have posted here repeatedly - what I would like to see is using the rapid-test approach in lieu of quarantine. Together with mandatary teacher/staff vax (since vaccinated don't have to quarantine), this would DRAMATICALLY reduce the number of quarantined kids to those who are actually covid positive (maybe extend to siblings as well). If the kid is covid positive, then I'm not that worried about virtual for them, since it will presumably be a one-time two-week quarantine. But provisions for the teacher sending written work virtually would probably be good.

quarantines can also be shortened to just 7 days (with a neg test taken on day 5). This is in line with the CDC. I would be comfortable with just asychronous work during that time, because it's relatively short and not likely to repeat.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/if-you-are-sick/quarantine.html

[Anonymous]

Current observations of the chief medical officer at a major pediatric hospital.

https://twitter.com/heather_haq/status/1421287982414409730?s=21

We are about 10% higher in vaccination rate but I still think it’s relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

Good luck. They won’t even explain what they would like to see for quarantined students, let alone those who want a full-time virtual public option.

I’m currently planning on sending my child (under 12) in-person, but I can legitimately see why some people do not want to when vaccines are a few months away. The cases above are terrible and we won’t know about any long-term damage for quite some time.

As I have posted here repeatedly - what I would like to see is using the rapid-test approach in lieu of quarantine. Together with mandatary teacher/staff vax (since vaccinated don't have to quarantine), this would DRAMATICALLY reduce the number of quarantined kids to those who are actually covid positive (maybe extend to siblings as well). If the kid is covid positive, then I'm not that worried about virtual for them, since it will presumably be a one-time two-week quarantine. But provisions for the teacher sending written work virtually would probably be good.

quarantines can also be shortened to just 7 days (with a neg test taken on day 5). This is in line with the CDC. I would be comfortable with just asychronous work during that time, because it's relatively short and not likely to repeat.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/if-you-are-sick/quarantine.html

+1

Disingenuous to suggest people haven't proposed alternatives for full-out-of-school quarantine, which they have over and over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

People have responded over and over and over again that DC does have virtual options. You just refuse to hear them because what you want is a virtual option and to save your seat "for a few months" at your current school. Again, there is no "for a few months". Covid is here and likely to stay. Childhood vaccine trials are just now adding to their samples, we don't know what results will be, we are learning daily that vaccines are amazing but not the end all be all, and variants will continue to emerge.

If you aren't ready to try school in person again, you may not be for years to come. And, you don't get to save a seat in a small program with that reality in place.

You do have options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want every single one of you people who are against a virtual OPTION to watch this (not just read the tweet, watch the video):

https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1422303133972242444?s=21

Did you watch? He said it was great that there would be a mask mandate as schools open, not that schools shouldn't open.

[Anonymous]

I also don't understand the moralizing of people saying they want a virtual option. There are virtual options. Choose one. No one is stopping you.