APS mask policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:22207 is seeing quite the spike in covid cases. Nottingham is now leading the pack for the past seven days, and my kid said there were a lot of kids out today who were there last week. Williamsburg just got a bunch of new cases today that will hit the dashboard in the next day or two. Mask optional seems to be working out brilliantly!

]

This is predictable given that 22207 is the home of the privileged antimask Covid deniers who have to get back to "normal."

This theory doesn't make any sense. If your description of 22207 were accurate, we would expect to see the 22207 schools with above-average case rates all through the pandemic because those families would have been engaged in higher-risk activities all along, but the data doesn't bear that out. For the pandemic as a whole, Yorktown is squarely in the middle between W-L and Wakefield, based on both total cases and relative to total student population. Hamm has the lowest case/student rate of the middle schools; Williamsburg is on the higher side, but clustered right with Gunston and Jefferson on a case/student basis. For the elementary schools, Discovery is above average on a case/student basis, but Nottingham, Jamestown and Taylor have been at or below average.

I can't tell you why there is a suddenly such a huge spike in cases in 22207, but the data does not support your theory.

Eh. Attitudes have been changing rapidly over the last few weeks and people who wore masks and took mandated precautions because they weren't rule breakers may feel more emboldened now that the mandates have dropped. If you look at the dashboard over the last 7 days for 22207 and the school breakdowns, Nottingham, Yorktown, Jamestown, and Williamsburg are all showing the highest number of cases across APS, in that order.

If that’s the case, and this is really about people who have been rule-followers all pandemic now skipping masks at schools because it’s no longer the rule, that’s a red flag that it may have been premature to remove the mask requirement now. APS’s hands are tied on that because the parental opt-out law makes it infeasible to enforce any mask requirements going forward. Youngkin and the Republicans in the General Assembly are fools.

Some people don't view the uptick in cases as a red flag or anything to feel overly concerned about. That's the disconnect that some posters are not getting. Some people are now thinking about getting and managing covid differently moving forward. Some people are okay with a low level of covid circulating. And yes, this is still a low level. I understand it makes some uncomfortable. Calling people fools is probably not helpful.

Also, there is still a legal case to be made that School Boards have the right to enforce mask mandates in their districts under VA constitution regardless of EOs and laws passed. This was part of their original case and I think is an issue still worth settling. I don't know if the School Boards will pursue this. However in general, around here I think an overwhelming majority of people will mask again when there are surges.

I can see that if you really don't want your child to get covid under any circumstance, this is all really unsettling and upsetting. If you were my friend in real life, I would tell you to find good quality KN95 masks and have your kids wear them well. Feel good about good weather and outside lunches, which APS has made a priority. And don't see anyone unmasked indoors. That's what you can do at this point.

Yes, people who don’t care about education will be unconcerned when 10% of a grade level misses nearly two full weeks of instruction due to a spike in case rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And deep breaths...

https://www.statnews.com/2022/02/14/controlled-studies-ease-worries-widespread-long-covid-kids/

"Over the last two years, experts’ understanding of long Covid in children has deepened. Several peer-reviewed studies now include control groups consisting of children who did not have Covid-19 but who have lived through the same pandemic conditions — loneliness, interrupted schooling, anxiety, tensions at home, the loss of loved ones, and the like.

These studies indicate that long Covid in children is rare and, when it does occur, is short-lived."

Multiple flaws in that supposed study of long covid in children cited in your article: https://twitter.com/HZiauddeen/status/1487247705638584322?s=20&t=3xPAYWBJdumM1XrRwonKCg

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:22207 is seeing quite the spike in covid cases. Nottingham is now leading the pack for the past seven days, and my kid said there were a lot of kids out today who were there last week. Williamsburg just got a bunch of new cases today that will hit the dashboard in the next day or two. Mask optional seems to be working out brilliantly!

]

This is predictable given that 22207 is the home of the privileged antimask Covid deniers who have to get back to "normal."

This theory doesn't make any sense. If your description of 22207 were accurate, we would expect to see the 22207 schools with above-average case rates all through the pandemic because those families would have been engaged in higher-risk activities all along, but the data doesn't bear that out. For the pandemic as a whole, Yorktown is squarely in the middle between W-L and Wakefield, based on both total cases and relative to total student population. Hamm has the lowest case/student rate of the middle schools; Williamsburg is on the higher side, but clustered right with Gunston and Jefferson on a case/student basis. For the elementary schools, Discovery is above average on a case/student basis, but Nottingham, Jamestown and Taylor have been at or below average.

I can't tell you why there is a suddenly such a huge spike in cases in 22207, but the data does not support your theory.

Eh. Attitudes have been changing rapidly over the last few weeks and people who wore masks and took mandated precautions because they weren't rule breakers may feel more emboldened now that the mandates have dropped. If you look at the dashboard over the last 7 days for 22207 and the school breakdowns, Nottingham, Yorktown, Jamestown, and Williamsburg are all showing the highest number of cases across APS, in that order.

If that’s the case, and this is really about people who have been rule-followers all pandemic now skipping masks at schools because it’s no longer the rule, that’s a red flag that it may have been premature to remove the mask requirement now. APS’s hands are tied on that because the parental opt-out law makes it infeasible to enforce any mask requirements going forward. Youngkin and the Republicans in the General Assembly are fools.

Some people don't view the uptick in cases as a red flag or anything to feel overly concerned about. That's the disconnect that some posters are not getting. Some people are now thinking about getting and managing covid differently moving forward. Some people are okay with a low level of covid circulating. And yes, this is still a low level. I understand it makes some uncomfortable. Calling people fools is probably not helpful.

Also, there is still a legal case to be made that School Boards have the right to enforce mask mandates in their districts under VA constitution regardless of EOs and laws passed. This was part of their original case and I think is an issue still worth settling. I don't know if the School Boards will pursue this. However in general, around here I think an overwhelming majority of people will mask again when there are surges.

I can see that if you really don't want your child to get covid under any circumstance, this is all really unsettling and upsetting. If you were my friend in real life, I would tell you to find good quality KN95 masks and have your kids wear them well. Feel good about good weather and outside lunches, which APS has made a priority. And don't see anyone unmasked indoors. That's what you can do at this point.

Yes, people who don’t care about education will be unconcerned when 10% of a grade level misses nearly two full weeks of instruction due to a spike in case rates.

The problem then is with the policy of forcing children to miss 2 weeks of school for something that is now less than a flu level of risk. It's an absurd policy, and it's needs to change.

The CDC actually says 5 days. APS is going further than that, and that has to stop. I hope the state steps in soon (once again).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:22207 is seeing quite the spike in covid cases. Nottingham is now leading the pack for the past seven days, and my kid said there were a lot of kids out today who were there last week. Williamsburg just got a bunch of new cases today that will hit the dashboard in the next day or two. Mask optional seems to be working out brilliantly!

]

This is predictable given that 22207 is the home of the privileged antimask Covid deniers who have to get back to "normal."

This theory doesn't make any sense. If your description of 22207 were accurate, we would expect to see the 22207 schools with above-average case rates all through the pandemic because those families would have been engaged in higher-risk activities all along, but the data doesn't bear that out. For the pandemic as a whole, Yorktown is squarely in the middle between W-L and Wakefield, based on both total cases and relative to total student population. Hamm has the lowest case/student rate of the middle schools; Williamsburg is on the higher side, but clustered right with Gunston and Jefferson on a case/student basis. For the elementary schools, Discovery is above average on a case/student basis, but Nottingham, Jamestown and Taylor have been at or below average.

I can't tell you why there is a suddenly such a huge spike in cases in 22207, but the data does not support your theory.

Eh. Attitudes have been changing rapidly over the last few weeks and people who wore masks and took mandated precautions because they weren't rule breakers may feel more emboldened now that the mandates have dropped. If you look at the dashboard over the last 7 days for 22207 and the school breakdowns, Nottingham, Yorktown, Jamestown, and Williamsburg are all showing the highest number of cases across APS, in that order.

If that’s the case, and this is really about people who have been rule-followers all pandemic now skipping masks at schools because it’s no longer the rule, that’s a red flag that it may have been premature to remove the mask requirement now. APS’s hands are tied on that because the parental opt-out law makes it infeasible to enforce any mask requirements going forward. Youngkin and the Republicans in the General Assembly are fools.

Some people don't view the uptick in cases as a red flag or anything to feel overly concerned about. That's the disconnect that some posters are not getting. Some people are now thinking about getting and managing covid differently moving forward. Some people are okay with a low level of covid circulating. And yes, this is still a low level. I understand it makes some uncomfortable. Calling people fools is probably not helpful.

Also, there is still a legal case to be made that School Boards have the right to enforce mask mandates in their districts under VA constitution regardless of EOs and laws passed. This was part of their original case and I think is an issue still worth settling. I don't know if the School Boards will pursue this. However in general, around here I think an overwhelming majority of people will mask again when there are surges.

I can see that if you really don't want your child to get covid under any circumstance, this is all really unsettling and upsetting. If you were my friend in real life, I would tell you to find good quality KN95 masks and have your kids wear them well. Feel good about good weather and outside lunches, which APS has made a priority. And don't see anyone unmasked indoors. That's what you can do at this point.

Yes, people who don’t care about education will be unconcerned when 10% of a grade level misses nearly two full weeks of instruction due to a spike in case rates.

Seriously people. Calm the F down. 10 percent of grade level is not missing instruction This is not what's happening and there is no indication this is what will happen.

How can you keep up this level of hysteria?????

[Anonymous]

Two teachers at Yorktown reported as positives today as well as another two student kids, and Nottingham students out with covid went up to 10.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And deep breaths...

https://www.statnews.com/2022/02/14/controlled-studies-ease-worries-widespread-long-covid-kids/

"Over the last two years, experts’ understanding of long Covid in children has deepened. Several peer-reviewed studies now include control groups consisting of children who did not have Covid-19 but who have lived through the same pandemic conditions — loneliness, interrupted schooling, anxiety, tensions at home, the loss of loved ones, and the like.

These studies indicate that long Covid in children is rare and, when it does occur, is short-lived."

Multiple flaws in that supposed study of long covid in children cited in your article: https://twitter.com/HZiauddeen/status/1487247705638584322?s=20&t=3xPAYWBJdumM1XrRwonKCg

I really enjoy when the rebuttal is on Twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And deep breaths...

https://www.statnews.com/2022/02/14/controlled-studies-ease-worries-widespread-long-covid-kids/

"Over the last two years, experts’ understanding of long Covid in children has deepened. Several peer-reviewed studies now include control groups consisting of children who did not have Covid-19 but who have lived through the same pandemic conditions — loneliness, interrupted schooling, anxiety, tensions at home, the loss of loved ones, and the like.

These studies indicate that long Covid in children is rare and, when it does occur, is short-lived."

Related article linked on that page: https://www.statnews.com/2021/06/10/as-more-kids-get-long-covid-doctors-still-cant-predict-who-is-at-risk/ As more kids go down the ‘deep, dark tunnel’ of long Covid, doctors still can’t predict who is at risk.

We could exchange these all day.

Except yours is an article from June 2021 and the previous poster posted an article from February 2022 with the most recent information available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And deep breaths...

https://www.statnews.com/2022/02/14/controlled-studies-ease-worries-widespread-long-covid-kids/

"Over the last two years, experts’ understanding of long Covid in children has deepened. Several peer-reviewed studies now include control groups consisting of children who did not have Covid-19 but who have lived through the same pandemic conditions — loneliness, interrupted schooling, anxiety, tensions at home, the loss of loved ones, and the like.

These studies indicate that long Covid in children is rare and, when it does occur, is short-lived."

Multiple flaws in that supposed study of long covid in children cited in your article: https://twitter.com/HZiauddeen/status/1487247705638584322?s=20&t=3xPAYWBJdumM1XrRwonKCg

I really enjoy when the rebuttal is on Twitter.

But some of the "experts" your side relies on (eg Vinay Prasad) get their messaging out through Twitter! Guess some animals are more equal that others with you guys. Anyway here is criticism of your article published in The Lancet making similar points to argue the study is biased and undercounts long covid in children in such a way that its totals are 7 times lower than would be expected: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00342-4/fulltext Oh I'm sure you'll say this is also invalid in some way since it interferes with your general let it rip message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And deep breaths...

https://www.statnews.com/2022/02/14/controlled-studies-ease-worries-widespread-long-covid-kids/

"Over the last two years, experts’ understanding of long Covid in children has deepened. Several peer-reviewed studies now include control groups consisting of children who did not have Covid-19 but who have lived through the same pandemic conditions — loneliness, interrupted schooling, anxiety, tensions at home, the loss of loved ones, and the like.

These studies indicate that long Covid in children is rare and, when it does occur, is short-lived."

Multiple flaws in that supposed study of long covid in children cited in your article: https://twitter.com/HZiauddeen/status/1487247705638584322?s=20&t=3xPAYWBJdumM1XrRwonKCg

I really enjoy when the rebuttal is on Twitter.

But some of the "experts" your side relies on (eg Vinay Prasad) get their messaging out through Twitter! Guess some animals are more equal that others with you guys. Anyway here is criticism of your article published in The Lancet making similar points to argue the study is biased and undercounts long covid in children in such a way that its totals are 7 times lower than would be expected: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00342-4/fulltext Oh I'm sure you'll say this is also invalid in some way since it interferes with your general let it rip message.

An article from crazy Independent SAGE people from the UK who push Zero COVID.

[Anonymous]

There you go! Of course you think it's invalid!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There you go! Of course you think it's invalid!!

Yes, just as I'd think an aeronautical engineer who thinks pigs can fly, I'd be skeptical of any research they have showing that pgis may fly. These people are huge Zero COVID advocates, which no serious scientist thinks is possible.

Meanwhile, gold standard randomized control trials (like that are used to approve medicines) show Long COVID is incredibly rare. So who to believe - a gold standard study or some crackpots who want the impossible to be true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:22207 is seeing quite the spike in covid cases. Nottingham is now leading the pack for the past seven days, and my kid said there were a lot of kids out today who were there last week. Williamsburg just got a bunch of new cases today that will hit the dashboard in the next day or two. Mask optional seems to be working out brilliantly!

]

This is predictable given that 22207 is the home of the privileged antimask Covid deniers who have to get back to "normal."

This theory doesn't make any sense. If your description of 22207 were accurate, we would expect to see the 22207 schools with above-average case rates all through the pandemic because those families would have been engaged in higher-risk activities all along, but the data doesn't bear that out. For the pandemic as a whole, Yorktown is squarely in the middle between W-L and Wakefield, based on both total cases and relative to total student population. Hamm has the lowest case/student rate of the middle schools; Williamsburg is on the higher side, but clustered right with Gunston and Jefferson on a case/student basis. For the elementary schools, Discovery is above average on a case/student basis, but Nottingham, Jamestown and Taylor have been at or below average.

I can't tell you why there is a suddenly such a huge spike in cases in 22207, but the data does not support your theory.

Eh. Attitudes have been changing rapidly over the last few weeks and people who wore masks and took mandated precautions because they weren't rule breakers may feel more emboldened now that the mandates have dropped. If you look at the dashboard over the last 7 days for 22207 and the school breakdowns, Nottingham, Yorktown, Jamestown, and Williamsburg are all showing the highest number of cases across APS, in that order.

22207 and 22213 (far northwest corner with both Discovery, Tuckahoe kids) have the LEAST cases per 100,000 over the entire pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two teachers at Yorktown reported as positives today as well as another two student kids, and Nottingham students out with covid went up to 10.

This cannot be a surprise with the masks coming off. Are people really surprised by this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:22207 is seeing quite the spike in covid cases. Nottingham is now leading the pack for the past seven days, and my kid said there were a lot of kids out today who were there last week. Williamsburg just got a bunch of new cases today that will hit the dashboard in the next day or two. Mask optional seems to be working out brilliantly!

]

This is predictable given that 22207 is the home of the privileged antimask Covid deniers who have to get back to "normal."

This theory doesn't make any sense. If your description of 22207 were accurate, we would expect to see the 22207 schools with above-average case rates all through the pandemic because those families would have been engaged in higher-risk activities all along, but the data doesn't bear that out. For the pandemic as a whole, Yorktown is squarely in the middle between W-L and Wakefield, based on both total cases and relative to total student population. Hamm has the lowest case/student rate of the middle schools; Williamsburg is on the higher side, but clustered right with Gunston and Jefferson on a case/student basis. For the elementary schools, Discovery is above average on a case/student basis, but Nottingham, Jamestown and Taylor have been at or below average.

I can't tell you why there is a suddenly such a huge spike in cases in 22207, but the data does not support your theory.

Eh. Attitudes have been changing rapidly over the last few weeks and people who wore masks and took mandated precautions because they weren't rule breakers may feel more emboldened now that the mandates have dropped. If you look at the dashboard over the last 7 days for 22207 and the school breakdowns, Nottingham, Yorktown, Jamestown, and Williamsburg are all showing the highest number of cases across APS, in that order.

22207 and 22213 (far northwest corner with both Discovery, Tuckahoe kids) have the LEAST cases per 100,000 over the entire pandemic.

Sure, this is a really white area with lots of attendant privilege of SAHM or working from home and perhaps not as much instances of larger generational families living together as you will see in South Arlington. Which is why it's rather interesting that now that kids are allowed to take off their masks, it's these northern families that are getting the highest numbers of infections. I know lots of minority families who have decided to keep their masks on due to inter generational family living circumstances and I wonder whether that could be driving some of this, but I'm just speculating. For now though it's definitely the northernmost, whitest parts of APS that are pinging more infections (by zip code 22207 alone has 32% across all APS; the next highest zip is 22201 at only 8%, 4x lower).

[Anonymous]

^ Back in the Omicron surge in Jan it was the Wakefield area that had cases in the hundreds. Those kids all have super immunity now.