Does DCPS care? New model shows even with masks, 40% of students will still be infected with Delta

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swann’s research shows that even with universal masks, 40% of elementary students will be infected with Delta IN THREE MONTHS.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-07-31/what-the-delta-variant-development-means-for-unvaccinated-kids

What I am seeing in this forum is parents refusing to test with their kid has “just a cold,” refusing asymptomatic testing, lying about travel so they don’t have to quarantine, etc. There is no distancing, no plan to upgrade ventilation, no mandatory teacher vaccinations, etc.

Has DCPS just given up?

I am one who would like a virtual option for my under 12 y.o. But the article says that the "research also shows that even if masking is required in all schools, if there are no other mitigation strategies, she still expects 40% of elementary school students to be infected within three months." That's critical point.

DCPS has no other mitigation strategies. The language they use for every proposed measure includes the caveat "TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE" which means absolutely nothing is required.

That's not the same thing as doing nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swann’s research shows that even with universal masks, 40% of elementary students will be infected with Delta IN THREE MONTHS.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-07-31/what-the-delta-variant-development-means-for-unvaccinated-kids

What I am seeing in this forum is parents refusing to test with their kid has “just a cold,” refusing asymptomatic testing, lying about travel so they don’t have to quarantine, etc. There is no distancing, no plan to upgrade ventilation, no mandatory teacher vaccinations, etc.

Has DCPS just given up?

I am one who would like a virtual option for my under 12 y.o. But the article says that the "research also shows that even if masking is required in all schools, if there are no other mitigation strategies, she still expects 40% of elementary school students to be infected within three months." That's critical point.

DCPS has no other mitigation strategies. The language they use for every proposed measure includes the caveat "TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE" which means absolutely nothing is required.

That's not the same thing as doing nothing.

This was mentioned upthread, but WTU literally took DCPS to arbitration over mitigation strategies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swann’s research shows that even with universal masks, 40% of elementary students will be infected with Delta IN THREE MONTHS.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-07-31/what-the-delta-variant-development-means-for-unvaccinated-kids

What I am seeing in this forum is parents refusing to test with their kid has “just a cold,” refusing asymptomatic testing, lying about travel so they don’t have to quarantine, etc. There is no distancing, no plan to upgrade ventilation, no mandatory teacher vaccinations, etc.

Has DCPS just given up?

I am one who would like a virtual option for my under 12 y.o. But the article says that the "research also shows that even if masking is required in all schools, if there are no other mitigation strategies, she still expects 40% of elementary school students to be infected within three months." That's critical point.

DCPS has no other mitigation strategies. The language they use for every proposed measure includes the caveat "TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE" which means absolutely nothing is required.

That's not the same thing as doing nothing.

This was mentioned upthread, but WTU literally took DCPS to arbitration over mitigation strategies.

Yes. and DCPS did those things. Is that what you are trying to say?

[Anonymous]

Meaning, the mitigation asked for by the WTU was found to have been done in all but two building, and in those two buildings the mitigation happened shortly thereafter.

DCPS had actually done what it said it would do, largely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

No, it’s a large enough health risk to ONLY society at large, specifically the segment of society that is choosing not to protect themselves (immune compromised aside, sorry y’all). I could not care less anymore about that segment of society, but particularly when they force children to shoulder the burden of their selfish choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

No, it’s a large enough health risk to ONLY society at large, specifically the segment of society that is choosing not to protect themselves (immune compromised aside, sorry y’all). I could not care less anymore about that segment of society, but particularly when they force children to shoulder the burden of their selfish choices.

This is where you lose me. Doctors and scientists are sounding the alarm on Delta in children. The latest stats are 1 in 22 children infected have long term symptoms. That’s very concerning, when you are talking about a highly transmissible virus. We should be working together to pressure DCPS to implement every mitigation strategy possible. Pretending children are not at risk is foolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

No, it’s a large enough health risk to ONLY society at large, specifically the segment of society that is choosing not to protect themselves (immune compromised aside, sorry y’all). I could not care less anymore about that segment of society, but particularly when they force children to shoulder the burden of their selfish choices.

This is where you lose me. Doctors and scientists are sounding the alarm on Delta in children. The latest stats are 1 in 22 children infected have long term symptoms. That’s very concerning, when you are talking about a highly transmissible virus. We should be working together to pressure DCPS to implement every mitigation strategy possible. Pretending children are not at risk is foolish.

Citation, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

No, it’s a large enough health risk to ONLY society at large, specifically the segment of society that is choosing not to protect themselves (immune compromised aside, sorry y’all). I could not care less anymore about that segment of society, but particularly when they force children to shoulder the burden of their selfish choices.

This is where you lose me. Doctors and scientists are sounding the alarm on Delta in children. The latest stats are 1 in 22 children infected have long term symptoms. That’s very concerning, when you are talking about a highly transmissible virus. We should be working together to pressure DCPS to implement every mitigation strategy possible. Pretending children are not at risk is foolish.

Citation, please.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00198-X/fulltext

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

No, it’s a large enough health risk to ONLY society at large, specifically the segment of society that is choosing not to protect themselves (immune compromised aside, sorry y’all). I could not care less anymore about that segment of society, but particularly when they force children to shoulder the burden of their selfish choices.

This is where you lose me. Doctors and scientists are sounding the alarm on Delta in children. The latest stats are 1 in 22 children infected have long term symptoms. That’s very concerning, when you are talking about a highly transmissible virus. We should be working together to pressure DCPS to implement every mitigation strategy possible. Pretending children are not at risk is foolish.

Citation, please.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00198-X/fulltext

You’ll need to copy/paste that link. Published yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given how contagious Delta is, I think many of us have resigned ourselves that our kids will probably get it at school despite mitigation measures. It’s a terrifying premise after essentially hiding out from the disease for over a year. But most of what I’m reading says that kids don’t get super sick. We didn’t live in a risk free world before Covid, and despite my anxiety disorder, I’m not going to insist on one now.

This is really it. I'd really love to avoid DC getting it before the child vaccine is approved, but at this point, it feels inevitable and I guess it's better for DC to develop some natural immunity before a worse variant comes along. So we'll keep wearing our masks and what will be, will be.

I don't understand your resignation, considering the vaccine is 5 months away, and you've successfully shielded you child for 18 months, admittedly from lesser 'versions' of the virus. Not looking to shame, but I need to understand.

You assume that the authorization is definitely coming. It may not. The risk to children under 12 is so low, that on the balance, vaccination isn't worth it.

The approval is coming.

There are MILLIONS of seniors and high risk individuals across the globe who are at risk of dying because they don’t have access to the vaccine in their country. How unethical would it be for Americans to start vaccinating children when there are so many people in our world who need it more.

[Anonymous]

I have vaccinated friends outside the D.C. area who got breakthrough infections and were pretty sick for a couple of weeks. Their kids, who got it first, had mild cold symptoms for two days. I'd rather get pretty sick for a couple of weeks than keep my kids home to avoid the risk of them getting the equivalent of a cold for two days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given how contagious Delta is, I think many of us have resigned ourselves that our kids will probably get it at school despite mitigation measures. It’s a terrifying premise after essentially hiding out from the disease for over a year. But most of what I’m reading says that kids don’t get super sick. We didn’t live in a risk free world before Covid, and despite my anxiety disorder, I’m not going to insist on one now.

This is really it. I'd really love to avoid DC getting it before the child vaccine is approved, but at this point, it feels inevitable and I guess it's better for DC to develop some natural immunity before a worse variant comes along. So we'll keep wearing our masks and what will be, will be.

I don't understand your resignation, considering the vaccine is 5 months away, and you've successfully shielded you child for 18 months, admittedly from lesser 'versions' of the virus. Not looking to shame, but I need to understand.

PP here. Yes, successfully, but at an ENORMOUS cost to my child's mental health. Which was necessary when nursing homes and hospitals were collapsing under COVID infections, possibly worth it before the vaccine was approved for adults (really for the sake of high risk, elderly, health care and essential workers, etc.), but when my SIX year old ends up in therapy for depression from isolation, despite a pod with their best friend and local cousins, then no, it's not worth any more months of sacrifice. And my kid isn't the only one, I know many, many parents that say their kids had the same issues as mine, despite loving homes, sibling playmates, Outschool classes, and pod friends. Let alone any of the actual at-risk kids that make our kids' struggles look like nothing in comparison to what they went through. It's time for this to be over and to prioritize children's mental and emotional health, and education.

And Delta is just so very transmissible. What we were able to do safely 6 months ago we cannot do safely anymore. So to truly shield my child, it would mean going back to spring 2020 levels of restrictions and that's impossible since I'm back in the office and schools are re-opening (as they should). And at this point it's simply unnecessary. I don't isolate my child to protect them from the flu or RSV, and I assume risk every day when we get in the car or cross the street. So in the words of Samuel, enough is enough, what will be, will be.

I'm so sorry. Our kids have had a horrible time of it too, especially our DC with more severe SN. Lots of emotional and behavior issues due to schools being closed and we're still dealing with it. Our kids HAVE to be in school. If I knew a year ago what I know now, then I would have sold our home and moved away from DC so my kids could go to in-person school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I remember some serious mitigation measures at sleep away camp when a camper was diagnosed with chicken pox a couple of days into it in the mid-80ies. Those were not parties. They took it extremely seriously, but that was forty years ago. They didn't need to do 1917-type masking because it wasn't a deadly pandemic, but they didn't have access to the rapid tests and abundance of masks we have in 2021. There is no excuse for this.

This is not a "deadly pandemic" for the under 12s.

If I had just written "they didn't have access to the abundance of masks we have in 2021", I'm pretty sure the tit-for-tat snarky retort would have been "Well in 1917 they figured out a way to mask up."

It's just a fact that it isn't.

Right.
Yet, it's enough of a health risk to unvaccinated children and society at large that masks in school mostly mandated. School mask mandates are necessary but not sufficient, hence OP's alarm.

No, it’s a large enough health risk to ONLY society at large, specifically the segment of society that is choosing not to protect themselves (immune compromised aside, sorry y’all). I could not care less anymore about that segment of society, but particularly when they force children to shoulder the burden of their selfish choices.

This is where you lose me. Doctors and scientists are sounding the alarm on Delta in children. The latest stats are 1 in 22 children infected have long term symptoms. That’s very concerning, when you are talking about a highly transmissible virus. We should be working together to pressure DCPS to implement every mitigation strategy possible. Pretending children are not at risk is foolish.

Citation, please.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00198-X/fulltext

You’ll need to copy/paste that link. Published yesterday.

Thanks for posting this. It's a useful study, but for purposes other than what you've stated, because it emphatically does not indicate what you're talking about.

I don't think you read the introductory materials carefully. I can see why, because it's a bit confusing, but essentially they're saying the length is not very different from that of children who tested negative for SARS-COV-2 (and thus were infected with some other virus). And the length is certainly not what we would consider long term, since it's 4 weeks with mild symptoms like anosmia, headache, and fatigue, and max 8. Fifty-six days of symptoms suck, but as an asthmatic child, I can tell you that I would regularly have a mild cough for months.

Please also note that this is all proxy-reported (not self-reported, even for 16-17 year olds!) data from an app available for free download. This is NOT a representative population. Also note that in the UK, the older children do not have access to vaccines like they do here. There is a significant age variation-- for ages 5-11, the duration for symptoms was typically 2 days.

Serious illness was statistically absent, and they couldn't do any sort of analysis based on hospital visits, since they were so rare.

Notably the children who were infected with something OTHER than SARS-COV-2 had a GREATER symptom burden over their entire illness, even if it didn't last quite as long.

There is not a single sentence in here which suggests substantial long-term illness in children. Parents should feel reassured by this study.

[Anonymous]

My personal conclusion based on this study is that I should not keep my kid out of school for the semester in fear that he might lose his sense of smell for 8 weeks.