The Wisconsin Study - valid analysis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, I am comparing in-school adult rate to county rate of everyone (to show where WP guy's 60% number came from). I agree that is not apples-to-apples, which I said. I was saying it is closer to apples-to-apples than the study because both groups are majority adults, unlike in the study.

They study does not have the data to compare in-school adults to out-of-school adults, but it does have enough information to show that the out-of-school adult rate must be lower than 8868.5/100k. The school adult rate is therefore between 0% higher (we know that's too low because it requires the outside community be made up of way too-high a % of kids) and 62% higher (we know that's too high like you said because it has kids in the denominator of community) than the non-school adult rate. Either way, the in-school adults have a higher rate than the non-school adults.

[Anonymous]

It’s time to understand that Covid is here to stay. Mitigate the worst effects - get the vaccine.

Move on and stop the drama. People - including those in a school environment - will get Covid. Much like people get the flu.

It’s time to live and focus on improving public schools for all. They are a disgrace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to understand that Covid is here to stay. Mitigate the worst effects - get the vaccine.

Move on and stop the drama. People - including those in a school environment - will get Covid. Much like people get the flu.

It’s time to live and focus on improving public schools for all. They are a disgrace.

Sure. I’ll accept that I’ll get COVID teaching once everyone else just accepts it too. Every office worker I know is working from home through the summer. Send them back and open everything up at full capacity. We’re all in this together, right? Surely schools should not be a more dangerous place than anywhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to understand that Covid is here to stay. Mitigate the worst effects - get the vaccine.

Move on and stop the drama. People - including those in a school environment - will get Covid. Much like people get the flu.

It’s time to live and focus on improving public schools for all. They are a disgrace.

Sure. I’ll accept that I’ll get COVID teaching once everyone else just accepts it too. Every office worker I know is working from home through the summer. Send them back and open everything up at full capacity. We’re all in this together, right? Surely schools should not be a more dangerous place than anywhere else.

You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

That's fine, you can have whatever attitude you want, but that's now what this thread is about. This thread is about the Wisconsin study people are citing as evidence that the risk to employees of returning to in person instruction in schools, with extensive mitigation, is less than it is to the general population. It appears that the risk to adult staff was higher than that of the general population. I think that is important information to have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

That's fine, you can have whatever attitude you want, but that's now what this thread is about. This thread is about the Wisconsin study people are citing as evidence that the risk to employees of returning to in person instruction in schools, with extensive mitigation, is less than it is to the general population. It appears that the risk to adult staff was higher than that of the general population. I think that is important information to have.

They also found this to be true in the UK, Texas, and New York. Sorry that you think it’s important for teachers to work in person but are unwilling to compensate us to account for the extra risk-doctors and nurses ARE getting hazard pay, and so did grocery workers. Sorry that communities are unwilling to cut back on travel, indoor dining, casinos, malls, and parties to drive down community infection rates. I’m not willing to put myself at risk so your kids can sit in a classroom during a pandemic while thousands of people die each day. Full stop. I have my own family whose safety is infinitely more important to me than the convenience of yours. Teachers have no obligation or duty to risk their lives for this job and we aren’t compensated as such. Schools are not hospitals or grocery stores, no matter how many times you repeat that. We will work from home until it’s safe to return, just like the rest of the workforce whose jobs don’t, in fact, have to be performed in person. No one prefers things this way, but I would much rather teach online than get COVID or spread it to my family. A lot of parents seem to think they’re justified in saying, “The level of risk you’d be undertaking is worth it to me, so we should open schools.” That’s just not how this works. You don’t get to force other people to work under hazardous conditions because you’ve decided it’s an acceptable amount of risk for them to take on.

https://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/covid-19-infection-rates-1-9-times-higher-among-teachers-coronavirus/

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2021/1/12/22227990/covid-teachers-school-reopening

https://www.kvue.com/amp/article/news/education/austin-covid-rates-increasing-in-schools/269-b117b076-c274-4134-981d-4e9b27b0c230

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

That's fine, you can have whatever attitude you want, but that's now what this thread is about. This thread is about the Wisconsin study people are citing as evidence that the risk to employees of returning to in person instruction in schools, with extensive mitigation, is less than it is to the general population. It appears that the risk to adult staff was higher than that of the general population. I think that is important information to have.

When you have looked up the rate of adults in Wisconsin, and compared, then you can state this. Since you haven't done that, you're speculating.

Here, I'll start: https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/covid-19/data.htm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

That's fine, you can have whatever attitude you want, but that's now what this thread is about. This thread is about the Wisconsin study people are citing as evidence that the risk to employees of returning to in person instruction in schools, with extensive mitigation, is less than it is to the general population. It appears that the risk to adult staff was higher than that of the general population. I think that is important information to have.

When you have looked up the rate of adults in Wisconsin, and compared, then you can state this. Since you haven't done that, you're speculating.

Here, I'll start: https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/covid-19/data.htm

Please share what number there shows an adult rate higher than 8868.5/100k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

That's fine, you can have whatever attitude you want, but that's now what this thread is about. This thread is about the Wisconsin study people are citing as evidence that the risk to employees of returning to in person instruction in schools, with extensive mitigation, is less than it is to the general population. It appears that the risk to adult staff was higher than that of the general population. I think that is important information to have.

They also found this to be true in the UK, Texas, and New York. Sorry that you think it’s important for teachers to work in person but are unwilling to compensate us to account for the extra risk-doctors and nurses ARE getting hazard pay, and so did grocery workers. Sorry that communities are unwilling to cut back on travel, indoor dining, casinos, malls, and parties to drive down community infection rates. I’m not willing to put myself at risk so your kids can sit in a classroom during a pandemic while thousands of people die each day. Full stop. I have my own family whose safety is infinitely more important to me than the convenience of yours. Teachers have no obligation or duty to risk their lives for this job and we aren’t compensated as such. Schools are not hospitals or grocery stores, no matter how many times you repeat that. We will work from home until it’s safe to return, just like the rest of the workforce whose jobs don’t, in fact, have to be performed in person. No one prefers things this way, but I would much rather teach online than get COVID or spread it to my family. A lot of parents seem to think they’re justified in saying, “The level of risk you’d be undertaking is worth it to me, so we should open schools.” That’s just not how this works. You don’t get to force other people to work under hazardous conditions because you’ve decided it’s an acceptable amount of risk for them to take on.

https://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/covid-19-infection-rates-1-9-times-higher-among-teachers-coronavirus/

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2021/1/12/22227990/covid-teachers-school-reopening

https://www.kvue.com/amp/article/news/education/austin-covid-rates-increasing-in-schools/269-b117b076-c274-4134-981d-4e9b27b0c230

Much of what you said is disputable, and I’m not going to bother, but I will say that I hope you are not taking advantage of the teacher priority for the vaccine if you have no intent to be in person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

That's fine, you can have whatever attitude you want, but that's now what this thread is about. This thread is about the Wisconsin study people are citing as evidence that the risk to employees of returning to in person instruction in schools, with extensive mitigation, is less than it is to the general population. It appears that the risk to adult staff was higher than that of the general population. I think that is important information to have.

They also found this to be true in the UK, Texas, and New York. Sorry that you think it’s important for teachers to work in person but are unwilling to compensate us to account for the extra risk-doctors and nurses ARE getting hazard pay, and so did grocery workers. Sorry that communities are unwilling to cut back on travel, indoor dining, casinos, malls, and parties to drive down community infection rates. I’m not willing to put myself at risk so your kids can sit in a classroom during a pandemic while thousands of people die each day. Full stop. I have my own family whose safety is infinitely more important to me than the convenience of yours. Teachers have no obligation or duty to risk their lives for this job and we aren’t compensated as such. Schools are not hospitals or grocery stores, no matter how many times you repeat that. We will work from home until it’s safe to return, just like the rest of the workforce whose jobs don’t, in fact, have to be performed in person. No one prefers things this way, but I would much rather teach online than get COVID or spread it to my family. A lot of parents seem to think they’re justified in saying, “The level of risk you’d be undertaking is worth it to me, so we should open schools.” That’s just not how this works. You don’t get to force other people to work under hazardous conditions because you’ve decided it’s an acceptable amount of risk for them to take on.

https://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/covid-19-infection-rates-1-9-times-higher-among-teachers-coronavirus/

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2021/1/12/22227990/covid-teachers-school-reopening

https://www.kvue.com/amp/article/news/education/austin-covid-rates-increasing-in-schools/269-b117b076-c274-4134-981d-4e9b27b0c230

Much of what you said is disputable, and I’m not going to bother, but I will say that I hope you are not taking advantage of the teacher priority for the vaccine if you have no intent to be in person.

DP. The only thing that needs to be discussed is what, if anything, is wrong with the studies she cited from the UK, Texas, and New York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to understand that Covid is here to stay. Mitigate the worst effects - get the vaccine.

Move on and stop the drama. People - including those in a school environment - will get Covid. Much like people get the flu.

It’s time to live and focus on improving public schools for all. They are a disgrace.

Sure. I’ll accept that I’ll get COVID teaching once everyone else just accepts it too. Every office worker I know is working from home through the summer. Send them back and open everything up at full capacity. We’re all in this together, right? Surely schools should not be a more dangerous place than anywhere else.

You aren’t an office worker. Nurses and doctors have been working in person through most of the pandemic. Same with grocery store workers, people who work in manufacturing plants and distribution centers, etc. I don’t understand the obsession with what office dwellers are doing. It’s a different job!

It’s not like the people we like best get to stay home and the people we don’t like have to go to work. That’s true in some workplaces but not across the board. Generally, people whose work requires in person are in person, and people whose work is mostly staring at a computer screen stay home. It’s a practical consideration, not a prize. And the idea that teachers won’t go back until even office workers go back is crazy, not least because some office workers will never go back. That’s because their employers realized they just don’t need to be in person. I am sorry, but that is not the conclusion we’ve drawn about schools.

Sorry that your profession is really important and we’ve collectively found that it really needs to be done in person?

Agree apples and oranges. Be grateful for your in-person requirement because you won't be outsourced. There's your reward. Office workers who can work from home have to carry THAT risk. Happy?

[Anonymous]

I have some interesting local data for you. My kids attend a small private school in Montgomery County. Testing is done every week, kids are in strict cohorts, and masks/social distancing required. The school did great throughout the fall. No cases. One family got COVID over Thanksgiving when kids were not in school. There were a few more families that got COVID around New Years, also outside of school, with no risk to students or teachers. Since January, there have been two "outbreaks." In one class, a child got COVID outside of school and transmitted it to two kids in the cohort. The teacher was NOT infected. In another class, the teacher got COVID outside of school and transmitted it to five kids in the class. I fully support opening schools and have no problem with my kids going to school in-person. But I recognize that even with safety precautions, the situation is not risk free. People can fight about the definition of "safe" but I do think 9 cases total is pretty low. I did find it interesting that the spread was higher when the original person infected was an adult. It does show that kids do not spread it as easily as adults. I suspect the kids were infected because they often don't wear quality or well fitting masks. Vaccinating teachers should dramatically lower the risk of spread in school. If kids wore proper fitting masks, it would help lower numbers too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Washington Post guy/gal is saying it's not fair to compare total in-school rates to rates for everyone else in the community because school populations are heavily weighted toward kids who are less likely to get COVID regardless of setting.

The 2728/100k child school rate is (133 school kids who got COVID)/(4867 total students in school). That's a higher rate than the 1811/100k for all kids. (I'm assuming that 1811 rate came from the state data in the other link. I didn't look at that).

The rate for in-school teachers was 58/654 = 8868.5/100k.

The study adds kids and teachers together to get (133+58)/(4876+654) = 3454/100k.

They then say that is better than the community rate of 4746/100k (I'm estimating this based on 73k total population in the county for kids+adults because I don't think the study shows community rates split by kids and adults).

WP guy is saying of course the rate for people in school is lower than for people not in school because school is made up of 88% kids. The remaining community members will be very highly weighted toward adults. I don't think we can figure out the exact % from the study because we can't tell how many children there are below school age in the county, but we do know it will be quite high and nowhere near 88% kids.

This does not address anything about about where transmission occurred, but this is what WP guy is saying. I apologize for any typos. I am very tired.

OP, here. Sorry, I just found this thread again. I didn’t realize it had been shifted to a different forum. Thank you for the explanation. That was perfect. I think I understand now.

[Anonymous]

Here's a new article for discussion.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/2021/1/12/22227990/covid-teachers-school-reopening?fbclid=IwAR3Fk2RscHicXJrnsgZNk09_-D-JHEgaDbRDz_F-IA4Z--wjB-iyeB0WCQ0

In New York, Texas, and a slice of the rest of the country where data is available, teachers and other staff where school buildings are open have higher COVID infection rates than their surrounding communities.

Critically, the data does not show whether teachers caught the virus in schools, or offer definitive answers about the risks of school reopening. It’s possible the results reflect more widespread testing among teachers, and the evidence that remote teachers have lower infection rates is mixed. But the latest data complicates our understanding of the risks of school reopening.

“The fact that the staff rates are growing at a faster rate than the community rates is something we should be paying attention to,” said Emily Oster, the Brown University researcher who spearheaded the analysis and collection of this data.

In November, Oster pointed to data showing that New York teachers were no more likely to have COVID than others in their community. That is no longer the case in New York, and it hasn’t been the case in Texas for months — two states that have some of the best data on the topic.

Experts consulted by Chalkbeat say the latest data is notable but not conclusive. The findings underscore how much the information school officials have to rely on when deciding to open school buildings continues to shift.

“The data do deserve further investigation and warrant explanation,” said Rebecca Haffajee, a public health researcher at the RAND Corporation.

School staff appear to be contracting COVID at higher rates than their surrounding communities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a new article for discussion.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/2021/1/12/22227990/covid-teachers-school-reopening?fbclid=IwAR3Fk2RscHicXJrnsgZNk09_-D-JHEgaDbRDz_F-IA4Z--wjB-iyeB0WCQ0

In New York, Texas, and a slice of the rest of the country where data is available, teachers and other staff where school buildings are open have higher COVID infection rates than their surrounding communities.

Critically, the data does not show whether teachers caught the virus in schools, or offer definitive answers about the risks of school reopening. It’s possible the results reflect more widespread testing among teachers, and the evidence that remote teachers have lower infection rates is mixed. But the latest data complicates our understanding of the risks of school reopening.

“The fact that the staff rates are growing at a faster rate than the community rates is something we should be paying attention to,” said Emily Oster, the Brown University researcher who spearheaded the analysis and collection of this data.

In November, Oster pointed to data showing that New York teachers were no more likely to have COVID than others in their community. That is no longer the case in New York, and it hasn’t been the case in Texas for months — two states that have some of the best data on the topic.

Experts consulted by Chalkbeat say the latest data is notable but not conclusive. The findings underscore how much the information school officials have to rely on when deciding to open school buildings continues to shift.

“The data do deserve further investigation and warrant explanation,” said Rebecca Haffajee, a public health researcher at the RAND Corporation.

School staff appear to be contracting COVID at higher rates than their surrounding communities

Ah, neat. "We don't know yet because we haven't evaluated all of the data, but decided to promote hysteria anyway!"