Have you sign-up for weekly asymptomatic testing at APS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The H1N1/swine flu was much, much less deadly than Covid. H1N1 infected 6 million people in the US and killed just 12.5K people altogether, for a mortality rate of 0.02% across the whole population. H1N1 killed about 600K people WORLDWIDE, whereas that is how many people it has killed so far in the US alone. Different viruses.

Not to children. It was much deadlier to children (1,800 children estimated in US for H1N1 in 2009-201 vs. 198 for COVID in 2020, 241 in 2021).

All of these regulations are absurd for children at this point, when you compare COVID to H1N1 or other bad flu seasons (434 est. for 2019-2020, 477 for 2018-2019, 643 for 2017-2018, 803 for 2014-2015, 1,161 for 2012-2013).
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html

So children have to be the sole bearer of the burden of COVID regulations, a disease that barely affects them? There are 3 vaccines available for the rest of the population.

The sole bearer of the burden? By getting a gentle swab in their nose once a week?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, if you look at last year's dashboard compared to this year's, there definitely seem to be more cases this year. Last year there were onesie twosie days interspersed occasionally with four and five cases a day. Now we are getting three and foursies interspersed with eight and nine cases a day. Eight kid cases reported today, 9 kid cases reported last Friday, 10 kid cases reported last Monday.

Not sure if these dashboard cases are overreported, or duplicates. That was a problem last year (though also underreporting on the dashboard has also been a problem).

There are more kids in school this year. A lot more.

or its bc of the stupid 'surveillance' testing which is catching asymptomatic cases that don't spread to anyone- and would have previously gone undetected- and insisting that they, and all their contacts, quarantine for 10-20 days.

I mean some people look at the '3 people' who were reportedly caught as asympomatic positives last week and say ' whew- that's three outbreaks averted.'

SOme of us look at the fact that only 1.4% of school contacts go on to test positive, and the amazingly low/no rate of transmission from asymptomatic cases (as compared to pre-sympomatic) and say- oh how dreadful, thats 3 kids who have lost 10 days of learning, plus their siblings who have now lost 20 days (can't get out of quarantine until 10 days after the end of positive person's quarantine) contacts, who have lost 10, etc... all of whom will almost certainly test negative.

yes- I am opposed to 'surveillance' testing in a school setting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, if you look at last year's dashboard compared to this year's, there definitely seem to be more cases this year. Last year there were onesie twosie days interspersed occasionally with four and five cases a day. Now we are getting three and foursies interspersed with eight and nine cases a day. Eight kid cases reported today, 9 kid cases reported last Friday, 10 kid cases reported last Monday.

Not sure if these dashboard cases are overreported, or duplicates. That was a problem last year (though also underreporting on the dashboard has also been a problem).

There are more kids in school this year. A lot more.

or its bc of the stupid 'surveillance' testing which is catching asymptomatic cases that don't spread to anyone- and would have previously gone undetected- and insisting that they, and all their contacts, quarantine for 10-20 days.

Surveillance testing just started. These are real cases.

Nice try!

[Anonymous]

The sole bearer of the burden? By getting a gentle swab in their nose once a week?

No - by being forced to stay out of school for 8 days because they happened to be in vicinity of an asymptomatic covid + child. Stop denying that keeping healthy kids out of school isn't placing a burden on them. It is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, if you look at last year's dashboard compared to this year's, there definitely seem to be more cases this year. Last year there were onesie twosie days interspersed occasionally with four and five cases a day. Now we are getting three and foursies interspersed with eight and nine cases a day. Eight kid cases reported today, 9 kid cases reported last Friday, 10 kid cases reported last Monday.

Not sure if these dashboard cases are overreported, or duplicates. That was a problem last year (though also underreporting on the dashboard has also been a problem).

There are more kids in school this year. A lot more.

or its bc of the stupid 'surveillance' testing which is catching asymptomatic cases that don't spread to anyone- and would have previously gone undetected- and insisting that they, and all their contacts, quarantine for 10-20 days.

Surveillance testing just started. These are real cases.

Nice try!

No it didn’t they are testing athletes and band daily and started the wide spread testing. Last week

[Anonymous]

I found this great study of cases from January 17 - present in King County, Washington - https://publichealthinsider.com/2021/09/03/new-data-dashboard-tracks-covid-19-risk-for-unvaccinated-people-compared-to-vaccinated-people/

It breaks down hospitalization rate by age for both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals:

The hospitalization rate for primary school-aged children is 0.05 cases per 100k of residents, and 0 for kids 12-15 who have been vaccinated. The hospitalizations are OVERWHELMINGLY in unvaccinated adults. Who are we protecting by keeping asymptomatic kids and their contacts out of school? Why should kids have to pay the price for keeping willfully self-harming adults out of the hospital? Enough!

[Anonymous]

Guys you're not going to believe it but the same people who said that results from a study on schools doing asymptomatic testing that was just published about three weeks ago were not at all relevant to the asymptomatic testing that Arlington was doing because the data was too old (didn't take vax rates into account) and was not from an area demonstrably similar to Arlington are now posting dashboards from SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, possibly the safest city in the United States, to argue that Arlington shouldn't do asymptomatic testing!

One year later, the Seattle area has the lowest death rate of the 20 largest metropolitan regions in the country. If the rest of the United States had kept pace with Seattle, the nation could have avoided more than 300,000 coronavirus deaths.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/11/us/coronavirus-seattle-success.html

Some might say this is hypocrisy, but I have to commend the creative view of applicability over time.

By the way -- not that this will make a difference to you -- but Seattle and King County which are the subject of the dashboard you posted (and it's a dashboard, not a study, but again, high marks for creativity) is -- and you're not going to believe this, but -- IMPLEMENTING COVID TESTING FOR ASYMPTOMATIC KIDS this year, although they have not had time to start the program up yet. They are doing this because in the past they have stayed ahead of the curve by employing safe practices and believe that asymptomatic testing is a good way to do that in the schools. I know, right? So crazy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guys you're not going to believe it but the same people who said that results from a study on schools doing asymptomatic testing that was just published about three weeks ago were not at all relevant to the asymptomatic testing that Arlington was doing because the data was too old (didn't take vax rates into account) and was not from an area demonstrably similar to Arlington are now posting dashboards from SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, possibly the safest city in the United States, to argue that Arlington shouldn't do asymptomatic testing!

One year later, the Seattle area has the lowest death rate of the 20 largest metropolitan regions in the country. If the rest of the United States had kept pace with Seattle, the nation could have avoided more than 300,000 coronavirus deaths.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/11/us/coronavirus-seattle-success.html

Some might say this is hypocrisy, but I have to commend the creative view of applicability over time.

By the way -- not that this will make a difference to you -- but Seattle and King County which are the subject of the dashboard you posted (and it's a dashboard, not a study, but again, high marks for creativity) is -- and you're not going to believe this, but -- IMPLEMENTING COVID TESTING FOR ASYMPTOMATIC KIDS this year, although they have not had time to start the program up yet. They are doing this because in the past they have stayed ahead of the curve by employing safe practices and believe that asymptomatic testing is a good way to do that in the schools. I know, right? So crazy!

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid, but it WILL cause damage to kids who have already missed 1.5 years of schooling. Arlington has a high 12+ vaccination rate, kids are masking in schools, most adults appear to be masking in public places. In that regard, Arlington is very similar to King County. And guess what -- Covid is almost exclusively a serious disease of unvaccinated adults both there and here. I have run out of sympathy for unvaccinated adults. Keeping them healthy is not the responsibility of children.

[Anonymous]

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid

How do you know the kids are asymptomatic vs. pre-symptomatic?

And asymptomatic cases can infect others...estimated to cause "one fifth of household infections".
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid

How do you know the kids are asymptomatic vs. pre-symptomatic?

And asymptomatic cases can infect others...estimated to cause "one fifth of household infections".
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

Link doesn’t work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid

How do you know the kids are asymptomatic vs. pre-symptomatic?

And asymptomatic cases can infect others...estimated to cause "one fifth of household infections".
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

Link doesn’t work.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

DP, but for future reference you can just copy and paste the text of the link and put in in your browser and hit go. But do you actually not know and need someone to prove to you that people who have covid but are asymptomatic actually can and have transmitted the virus to others? I thought we all learned that in early times even before Delta. I don't understand how you don't know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The sole bearer of the burden? By getting a gentle swab in their nose once a week?

No - by being forced to stay out of school for 8 days because they happened to be in vicinity of an asymptomatic covid + child. Stop denying that keeping healthy kids out of school isn't placing a burden on them. It is.

Yeah I really wish they had a sufficient supply of rapid tests and could institute a test to stay protocol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid

How do you know the kids are asymptomatic vs. pre-symptomatic?

And asymptomatic cases can infect others...estimated to cause "one fifth of household infections".
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

Link doesn’t work.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

DP, but for future reference you can just copy and paste the text of the link and put in in your browser and hit go. But do you actually not know and need someone to prove to you that people who have covid but are asymptomatic actually can and have transmitted the virus to others? I thought we all learned that in early times even before Delta. I don't understand how you don't know this.

‘Can and have’ is extraordinarily different than ‘likely to’. So the study says that 20 percent of infections from a household member (eg those you live with, unmasked) were a symptomatic. 80 percent were symptomatic.
Last year 1.4 percent of school contacts developed COVID. That’s extraordinarily low. Now make that asymptotic s hook contacts and we are way below a 1 percent probability. Yet we are quarantining those kids and forcing them out of school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid

How do you know the kids are asymptomatic vs. pre-symptomatic?

And asymptomatic cases can infect others...estimated to cause "one fifth of household infections".
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

Link doesn’t work.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

DP, but for future reference you can just copy and paste the text of the link and put in in your browser and hit go. But do you actually not know and need someone to prove to you that people who have covid but are asymptomatic actually can and have transmitted the virus to others? I thought we all learned that in early times even before Delta. I don't understand how you don't know this.

‘Can and have’ is extraordinarily different than ‘likely to’. So the study says that 20 percent of infections from a household member (eg those you live with, unmasked) were a symptomatic. 80 percent were symptomatic.
Last year 1.4 percent of school contacts developed COVID. That’s extraordinarily low. Now make that asymptotic s hook contacts and we are way below a 1 percent probability. Yet we are quarantining those kids and forcing them out of school

Last year the kids were spaced 6 feet and 10 at lunch, and schools were far below capacity, and we were dealing with a different variant. We're in different times now. Or haven't you been keeping up with the news?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Making the contacts of asymptomatic Covid positive kids stay home from school is unnecessary and cruel. It will make no dent on the spread of Covid

How do you know the kids are asymptomatic vs. pre-symptomatic?

And asymptomatic cases can infect others...estimated to cause "one fifth of household infections".
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

Link doesn’t work.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

DP, but for future reference you can just copy and paste the text of the link and put in in your browser and hit go. But do you actually not know and need someone to prove to you that people who have covid but are asymptomatic actually can and have transmitted the virus to others? I thought we all learned that in early times even before Delta. I don't understand how you don't know this.

‘Can and have’ is extraordinarily different than ‘likely to’. So the study says that 20 percent of infections from a household member (eg those you live with, unmasked) were a symptomatic. 80 percent were symptomatic.
Last year 1.4 percent of school contacts developed COVID. That’s extraordinarily low. Now make that asymptotic s hook contacts and we are way below a 1 percent probability. Yet we are quarantining those kids and forcing them out of school

Last year the kids were spaced 6 feet and 10 at lunch, and schools were far below capacity, and we were dealing with a different variant. We're in different times now. Or haven't you been keeping up with the news?

Cases are going down in Arlington, now that schools are open.

Sometimes I feel like certain people want in-person school to fail, because its success will be a rebuke of everything they did last year (Ventilation Woman, Lunch Petitioner, CO2 Monitor Woman). I suppose if I fought for what will be the biggest educational disaster of my lifetime, I'd be pretty defensive about it too.

Admitting that schools are safe (and were safe last year) would mean coming to terms with the fact that you destroyed the educations of an entire generation of kids because of your own irrational anxiety. I'd be desperate too.

This surveillance testing is another way to pad these people's ego. I won't sign up.