Have you sign-up for weekly asymptomatic testing at APS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I rarely look at AEM, but I did- and now I know that the person spreading the inaccurate information here about having 'talked to the lab' and learned that this lab has come up with some process to diagnose 'active infection' that the CDC doesn't even think exists, is none other than our favorite ventilation lady, or someone who is talking to her.

Also- interesting that the same lab which 'doesn't have time' to send negative test results to kids who need them to get back into school- has lots of time to spend hours talking to parents......

Ventilation Lady and Smart Restart spreading misinformation?!? No way!

She so believes in what she posts, she blocks anyone who will leave a comment slightly disagreeing with her. True believer there. This is a religion to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I rarely look at AEM, but I did- and now I know that the person spreading the inaccurate information here about having 'talked to the lab' and learned that this lab has come up with some process to diagnose 'active infection' that the CDC doesn't even think exists, is none other than our favorite ventilation lady, or someone who is talking to her.

Also- interesting that the same lab which 'doesn't have time' to send negative test results to kids who need them to get back into school- has lots of time to spend hours talking to parents......

Ventilation Lady and Smart Restart spreading misinformation?!? No way!

She so believes in what she posts, she blocks anyone who will leave a comment slightly disagreeing with her. True believer there. This is a religion to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're not going to sign up for testing, that's pretty clear. Very sad.

Tell that to the 80%+ of people who didn't sign up.

LOL. We don’t have 80% anti-testers.

We have some who didn’t know about it, some who didn’t understand it, and some who tried but the opt-in form was too confusing/laborious.

Only a small % were selfish a-holes who decided NOT to do the right thing.

You have the breakdown on those numbers? Would be very interested to see them and where they came from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you objecting to asymptomatic testing, don't you remember when we had children do asymptomatic testing for the swine flu in 2009-2010, causing tons of healthy kids who were close contact to miss school? Oh yeah, neither do I.

The Swine flu is estimated to have killed 3x to 4x more kids on an annual basis than COVID (CDC had to estimate because they weren't testing people like crazy):
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-flu-usa/swine-flu-has-killed-up-to-17000-in-u-s-report-idUSN1223579720100212

Flu is also often transmitted asymptomatically:
https://www.contagionlive.com/view/asymptomatic-influenza-infection-rates-deserve-more-attention

Stop asking such logical questions! Pfizer just announced that they could not directly test the efficacy of the vaccine in the trial they just conducted because of how rarely children 5-11 become seriously ill with COVID.

That is why I did not sign my children up for asymptomatic screening. This nonsense has to stop.

“Nonsense”? JFC.

Yes, when a recent flu SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous to children did not result in any asymptomatic testing, forced masking and other restrictive rules, the only logical explanation is pure hysteria.

H1N1 is still here too, just like COVID will be in 2031. These policies imply COVID will be eradicated, which it will not be. Significant disruptions of children's education for little benefit.

You're forgetting these policies do provide the benefit to closed school activists of avoiding cognitive dissonance from the significant harm these closed school policies they advocated for inflicted on children (they're still advocating for closed schools as they want healthy children to be out of school).

No one is advocating for “closed schools”, nut job.

Vaccinate*, mask, test.

*kids soon too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're not going to sign up for testing, that's pretty clear. Very sad.

Tell that to the 80%+ of people who didn't sign up.

LOL. We don’t have 80% anti-testers.

We have some who didn’t know about it, some who didn’t understand it, and some who tried but the opt-in form was too confusing/laborious.

Only a small % were selfish a-holes who decided NOT to do the right thing.

My impression from talking to people I know is that a lot of the people who didn't sign up support the idea in theory, but are concerned about how it will work in practice. Someone raised questions on AEM last night (in the thread about the algorithm from the woman who called the testing company) about what happens if there are conflicting results between the algorithm and the confirmation test or if there are multiple positives in the pools that implicate several students not all of whom have covid. People are legitimately concerned about how opaque the process is and whether their child could be barred from going to school when they are negative for covid because of flaws in the testing protocols.

As one of the "very small %age of a--holes who didn't sign up," -- THIS! This is why we didn't sign-up, except for one child who is being tested daily to participate in extracurricular activity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're not going to sign up for testing, that's pretty clear. Very sad.

Tell that to the 80%+ of people who didn't sign up.

LOL. We don’t have 80% anti-testers.

We have some who didn’t know about it, some who didn’t understand it, and some who tried but the opt-in form was too confusing/laborious.

Only a small % were selfish a-holes who decided NOT to do the right thing.

My impression from talking to people I know is that a lot of the people who didn't sign up support the idea in theory, but are concerned about how it will work in practice. Someone raised questions on AEM last night (in the thread about the algorithm from the woman who called the testing company) about what happens if there are conflicting results between the algorithm and the confirmation test or if there are multiple positives in the pools that implicate several students not all of whom have covid. People are legitimately concerned about how opaque the process is and whether their child could be barred from going to school when they are negative for covid because of flaws in the testing protocols.

As one of the "very small %age of a--holes who didn't sign up," -- THIS! This is why we didn't sign-up, except for one child who is being tested daily to participate in extracurricular activity.

Sounds like you haven’t signed up *yet* because you didn’t fully understand the testing process (due to lack of info).

Not just because you didn’t want to test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you objecting to asymptomatic testing, don't you remember when we had children do asymptomatic testing for the swine flu in 2009-2010, causing tons of healthy kids who were close contact to miss school? Oh yeah, neither do I.

The Swine flu is estimated to have killed 3x to 4x more kids on an annual basis than COVID (CDC had to estimate because they weren't testing people like crazy):
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-flu-usa/swine-flu-has-killed-up-to-17000-in-u-s-report-idUSN1223579720100212

Flu is also often transmitted asymptomatically:
https://www.contagionlive.com/view/asymptomatic-influenza-infection-rates-deserve-more-attention

Stop asking such logical questions! Pfizer just announced that they could not directly test the efficacy of the vaccine in the trial they just conducted because of how rarely children 5-11 become seriously ill with COVID.

That is why I did not sign my children up for asymptomatic screening. This nonsense has to stop.

“Nonsense”? JFC.

Yes, when a recent flu SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous to children did not result in any asymptomatic testing, forced masking and other restrictive rules, the only logical explanation is pure hysteria.

H1N1 is still here too, just like COVID will be in 2031. These policies imply COVID will be eradicated, which it will not be. Significant disruptions of children's education for little benefit.

You're forgetting these policies do provide the benefit to closed school activists of avoiding cognitive dissonance from the significant harm these closed school policies they advocated for inflicted on children (they're still advocating for closed schools as they want healthy children to be out of school).

No one is advocating for “closed schools”, nut job.

Vaccinate*, mask, test.

*kids soon too!

Why do these things for something a fraction less deadly to children than H1N1?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is about everybody, not just our individual families. It's about the kid who is asymptomatic but got it from his asymptomatic brother and who spreads it to a classmate who takes it home to her mom who is immunocompromised because she is undergoing chemo for cancer, or to her granddad who was vaccinated but has a severe breakthrough infection that lands him in the hospital. Kids are largely asymptomatic and unlikely to get seriously sick thank god, but others are not so lucky. Over 650,000 deaths is a horrible reality, it is not fear mongering to ask everyone to take one small free step to try to prevent the spread.

The death toll is tragic and includes some of my family members. My aunt made a choice not to get vaccinated and caught covid at Fourth of July barbecue, and she died in August after an extremely painful struggle.

We need to stop blaming children for killing off grandparents as if they are the only point of contact to the outside world. Many people (except maybe in the DC area) are back in offices, going to restaurants, concerts, church, and more. Focus on mandates for grown-ups to get vaccinated and wear masks when appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is about everybody, not just our individual families. It's about the kid who is asymptomatic but got it from his asymptomatic brother and who spreads it to a classmate who takes it home to her mom who is immunocompromised because she is undergoing chemo for cancer, or to her granddad who was vaccinated but has a severe breakthrough infection that lands him in the hospital. Kids are largely asymptomatic and unlikely to get seriously sick thank god, but others are not so lucky. Over 650,000 deaths is a horrible reality, it is not fear mongering to ask everyone to take one small free step to try to prevent the spread.

The death toll is tragic and includes some of my family members. My aunt made a choice not to get vaccinated and caught covid at Fourth of July barbecue, and she died in August after an extremely painful struggle.

We need to stop blaming children for killing off grandparents as if they are the only point of contact to the outside world. Many people (except maybe in the DC area) are back in offices, going to restaurants, concerts, church, and more. Focus on mandates for grown-ups to get vaccinated and wear masks when appropriate.

We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're not going to sign up for testing, that's pretty clear. Very sad.

Tell that to the 80%+ of people who didn't sign up.

LOL. We don’t have 80% anti-testers.

We have some who didn’t know about it, some who didn’t understand it, and some who tried but the opt-in form was too confusing/laborious.

Only a small % were selfish a-holes who decided NOT to do the right thing.

My impression from talking to people I know is that a lot of the people who didn't sign up support the idea in theory, but are concerned about how it will work in practice. Someone raised questions on AEM last night (in the thread about the algorithm from the woman who called the testing company) about what happens if there are conflicting results between the algorithm and the confirmation test or if there are multiple positives in the pools that implicate several students not all of whom have covid. People are legitimately concerned about how opaque the process is and whether their child could be barred from going to school when they are negative for covid because of flaws in the testing protocols.

As one of the "very small %age of a--holes who didn't sign up," -- THIS! This is why we didn't sign-up, except for one child who is being tested daily to participate in extracurricular activity.

All of this. APS needs to send an email as well as update the website with exactly how these algorithms work. Because this is all they have right now, and it's not enough information:

During this method of testing the identity and integrity of individual samples collected as part of the program are maintained. If a pool were to come up as a positive, the laboratory uses an algorithm to determine which samples to test for confirmation of which student(s) within the pool are positive. These confirmation results will be followed up with a running of the individual sample(s) identified to confirm positive status.

During the confirmation period, the suspected positive student(s) in the pool who are identified using the algorithm will be excluded from in person instruction and activities. The family can expect to receive definitive confirmation of the positive results after individual sample(s) are ran for confirmation which on average is 12-24 hours. The entire participants in the pool will not need to quarantine during this process unless they are identified as a suspected case using the algorithm on the pooled samples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you objecting to asymptomatic testing, don't you remember when we had children do asymptomatic testing for the swine flu in 2009-2010, causing tons of healthy kids who were close contact to miss school? Oh yeah, neither do I.

The Swine flu is estimated to have killed 3x to 4x more kids on an annual basis than COVID (CDC had to estimate because they weren't testing people like crazy):
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-flu-usa/swine-flu-has-killed-up-to-17000-in-u-s-report-idUSN1223579720100212

Flu is also often transmitted asymptomatically:
https://www.contagionlive.com/view/asymptomatic-influenza-infection-rates-deserve-more-attention

Stop asking such logical questions! Pfizer just announced that they could not directly test the efficacy of the vaccine in the trial they just conducted because of how rarely children 5-11 become seriously ill with COVID.

That is why I did not sign my children up for asymptomatic screening. This nonsense has to stop.

“Nonsense”? JFC.

Yes, when a recent flu SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous to children did not result in any asymptomatic testing, forced masking and other restrictive rules, the only logical explanation is pure hysteria.

H1N1 is still here too, just like COVID will be in 2031. These policies imply COVID will be eradicated, which it will not be. Significant disruptions of children's education for little benefit.

You're forgetting these policies do provide the benefit to closed school activists of avoiding cognitive dissonance from the significant harm these closed school policies they advocated for inflicted on children (they're still advocating for closed schools as they want healthy children to be out of school).

No one is advocating for “closed schools”, nut job.

Vaccinate*, mask, test.

*kids soon too!

Why do these things for something a fraction less deadly to children than H1N1?

Because there isn't an H1N1 pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're not going to sign up for testing, that's pretty clear. Very sad.

Tell that to the 80%+ of people who didn't sign up.

LOL. We don’t have 80% anti-testers.

We have some who didn’t know about it, some who didn’t understand it, and some who tried but the opt-in form was too confusing/laborious.

Only a small % were selfish a-holes who decided NOT to do the right thing.

My impression from talking to people I know is that a lot of the people who didn't sign up support the idea in theory, but are concerned about how it will work in practice. Someone raised questions on AEM last night (in the thread about the algorithm from the woman who called the testing company) about what happens if there are conflicting results between the algorithm and the confirmation test or if there are multiple positives in the pools that implicate several students not all of whom have covid. People are legitimately concerned about how opaque the process is and whether their child could be barred from going to school when they are negative for covid because of flaws in the testing protocols.

As one of the "very small %age of a--holes who didn't sign up," -- THIS! This is why we didn't sign-up, except for one child who is being tested daily to participate in extracurricular activity.

Sounds like you haven’t signed up *yet* because you didn’t fully understand the testing process (due to lack of info).

Not just because you didn’t want to test.

This is us. I have a large stockpile of rapid tests. We test kids ourselves. If we get a positive, I would follow up with a pcr. I do not trust these pooled tests to work through the red tape quickly to get my kid back to school if they are in fact negative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're not going to sign up for testing, that's pretty clear. Very sad.

Tell that to the 80%+ of people who didn't sign up.

LOL. We don’t have 80% anti-testers.

We have some who didn’t know about it, some who didn’t understand it, and some who tried but the opt-in form was too confusing/laborious.

Only a small % were selfish a-holes who decided NOT to do the right thing.

My impression from talking to people I know is that a lot of the people who didn't sign up support the idea in theory, but are concerned about how it will work in practice. Someone raised questions on AEM last night (in the thread about the algorithm from the woman who called the testing company) about what happens if there are conflicting results between the algorithm and the confirmation test or if there are multiple positives in the pools that implicate several students not all of whom have covid. People are legitimately concerned about how opaque the process is and whether their child could be barred from going to school when they are negative for covid because of flaws in the testing protocols.

As one of the "very small %age of a--holes who didn't sign up," -- THIS! This is why we didn't sign-up, except for one child who is being tested daily to participate in extracurricular activity.

Sounds like you haven’t signed up *yet* because you didn’t fully understand the testing process (due to lack of info).

Not just because you didn’t want to test.

This is us. I have a large stockpile of rapid tests. We test kids ourselves. If we get a positive, I would follow up with a pcr. I do not trust these pooled tests to work through the red tape quickly to get my kid back to school if they are in fact negative.

Yep - exactly the same here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you objecting to asymptomatic testing, don't you remember when we had children do asymptomatic testing for the swine flu in 2009-2010, causing tons of healthy kids who were close contact to miss school? Oh yeah, neither do I.

The Swine flu is estimated to have killed 3x to 4x more kids on an annual basis than COVID (CDC had to estimate because they weren't testing people like crazy):
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-flu-usa/swine-flu-has-killed-up-to-17000-in-u-s-report-idUSN1223579720100212

Flu is also often transmitted asymptomatically:
https://www.contagionlive.com/view/asymptomatic-influenza-infection-rates-deserve-more-attention

Stop asking such logical questions! Pfizer just announced that they could not directly test the efficacy of the vaccine in the trial they just conducted because of how rarely children 5-11 become seriously ill with COVID.

That is why I did not sign my children up for asymptomatic screening. This nonsense has to stop.

“Nonsense”? JFC.

Yes, when a recent flu SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous to children did not result in any asymptomatic testing, forced masking and other restrictive rules, the only logical explanation is pure hysteria.

H1N1 is still here too, just like COVID will be in 2031. These policies imply COVID will be eradicated, which it will not be. Significant disruptions of children's education for little benefit.

You're forgetting these policies do provide the benefit to closed school activists of avoiding cognitive dissonance from the significant harm these closed school policies they advocated for inflicted on children (they're still advocating for closed schools as they want healthy children to be out of school).

No one is advocating for “closed schools”, nut job.

Vaccinate*, mask, test.

*kids soon too!

Why do these things for something a fraction less deadly to children than H1N1?

Because there isn't an H1N1 pandemic.

0 logic. We didn't do them in 2009-2010 when the H1N1 pandemic occurred

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you objecting to asymptomatic testing, don't you remember when we had children do asymptomatic testing for the swine flu in 2009-2010, causing tons of healthy kids who were close contact to miss school? Oh yeah, neither do I.

The Swine flu is estimated to have killed 3x to 4x more kids on an annual basis than COVID (CDC had to estimate because they weren't testing people like crazy):
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-flu-usa/swine-flu-has-killed-up-to-17000-in-u-s-report-idUSN1223579720100212

Flu is also often transmitted asymptomatically:
https://www.contagionlive.com/view/asymptomatic-influenza-infection-rates-deserve-more-attention

Stop asking such logical questions! Pfizer just announced that they could not directly test the efficacy of the vaccine in the trial they just conducted because of how rarely children 5-11 become seriously ill with COVID.

That is why I did not sign my children up for asymptomatic screening. This nonsense has to stop.

“Nonsense”? JFC.

Yes, when a recent flu SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous to children did not result in any asymptomatic testing, forced masking and other restrictive rules, the only logical explanation is pure hysteria.

H1N1 is still here too, just like COVID will be in 2031. These policies imply COVID will be eradicated, which it will not be. Significant disruptions of children's education for little benefit.

You're forgetting these policies do provide the benefit to closed school activists of avoiding cognitive dissonance from the significant harm these closed school policies they advocated for inflicted on children (they're still advocating for closed schools as they want healthy children to be out of school).

No one is advocating for “closed schools”, nut job.

Vaccinate*, mask, test.

*kids soon too!

Why do these things for something a fraction less deadly to children than H1N1?

Because there isn't an H1N1 pandemic.

0 logic. We didn't do them in 2009-2010 when the H1N1 pandemic occurred

It wasn't a pandemic.