Last minute plan B if schools don’t open?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As a teacher, I’m 100% confident that we will be in person. I just finished DCs leadership academy this week and they have every indication of business as usual 8/30
If I was a parent I’d be real worried that there are no quarantine policies for concurrent teaching. Last year it was easier when we had to shut down bc students were used to virtual learning, and a lot of teachers already had created in person lessons that could be accessible virtually. I’m not sure how that’s all going to work this year. When we ask Dcps we get nothing

Great job, everyone. The political pressure you've applied have scared DCPS away from having any contingency plans. Because so many of you have screamed bloody murder that the schools better not be planning for anything less than 100% attendance, full day, 5 days a way -- no matter what the metrics may actually look during the school year.

More than 16,600 children had been hospitalized with the coronavirus thus far, and schools haven't started back up yet. Kids are on ventilators. For the idiots who think "Delta doesn't make kids more ill," it does make MORE kids ill, and so there will be a lot more kids who will be severely ill.

But your tantrums have resulted in there being no backup plan, so kids will be in school until Delta is already spreading like wildfire because there's nothing to fall back on.

Yes, I want kids to remain in school as long as possible. I have a kid who is high risk, and I haven't requested a virtual waiver because their ADHD makes it impossible for them to access virtual learning. I full expect that we will have to pull our kid our early because the pigheadedness that has resulted in no backup plan.

So thanks a lot for making it impossible for schools to take action before someone's kid -- maybe your own, maybe mine -- has to pay the price.

here’s the door to Friendship Online Charter. Don’t let it hit ya on the way out!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

I think this previous quote puts it all in perspective:

Out of about 3.5 million cases of Covid-19 in children in the United States, the National Center for Health Statistics has reported, as of July 28, that 519 children have died from Covid-19 (fewer than 0.015 percent), including 346 children 5 to 17 years of age, and 173 children 4 or younger. Children with underlying medical conditions are the most likely to be hospitalized. Black and Hispanic children also had higher rates of hospitalization, although overall risk remained low."
...
"While any death of a child is devastating, it may help parents to think about other risks to childhood health compared to Covid-19. The C.D.C. estimates there were 480 deaths among children from influenza during the 2018-19 school year. Injury is the leading cause of death among children — about 12,000 children and young adults 1 to 19 years of age die in accidents each year, including more than 4,000 deaths in car crashes, 900 drowning accidents and 761 unintentional poisonings or drug overdoses.

[Anonymous]

If you enroll your kids and the local rates spike,.will they be truant if you keep them out until they subside? I don't care if they have DL in place or what. At some rate of community infection (like DC last fall) I'm not going to be comfy with my unvaccinated kid iN person learning. i personally don't want my kid catching delta. Yes, less harmful yadda yadda. But for some kids it's equally harmful and we do not know the long term effects..I'm personally convinced it's a made , biological weapon best to be avoided including by children (( it's a super weird virus..if it's from the cold family, it's the cold.from war of the worlds IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

As a teacher, I’m 100% confident that we will be in person. I just finished DCs leadership academy this week and they have every indication of business as usual 8/30
If I was a parent I’d be real worried that there are no quarantine policies for concurrent teaching. Last year it was easier when we had to shut down bc students were used to virtual learning, and a lot of teachers already had created in person lessons that could be accessible virtually. I’m not sure how that’s all going to work this year. When we ask Dcps we get nothing

Great job, everyone. The political pressure you've applied have scared DCPS away from having any contingency plans. Because so many of you have screamed bloody murder that the schools better not be planning for anything less than 100% attendance, full day, 5 days a way -- no matter what the metrics may actually look during the school year.

More than 16,600 children had been hospitalized with the coronavirus thus far, and schools haven't started back up yet. Kids are on ventilators. For the idiots who think "Delta doesn't make kids more ill," it does make MORE kids ill, and so there will be a lot more kids who will be severely ill.

But your tantrums have resulted in there being no backup plan, so kids will be in school until Delta is already spreading like wildfire because there's nothing to fall back on.

Yes, I want kids to remain in school as long as possible. I have a kid who is high risk, and I haven't requested a virtual waiver because their ADHD makes it impossible for them to access virtual learning. I full expect that we will have to pull our kid our early because the pigheadedness that has resulted in no backup plan.

So thanks a lot for making it impossible for schools to take action before someone's kid -- maybe your own, maybe mine -- has to pay the price.

+1
And as of yesterday's news, apparently, not just more kids ill, but kids more ill, as they've now established that delta causes more severe illness.

Please cite the link for delta causing more severe illness in children.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/07/29/cdc-mask-guidance/
More severe illness. It doesn't specify 'in children', it just implies 'in humans,' which children are.

and yet, UK and Netherlands did not see an epidemic of child covid deaths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The data on delta in kids is still coming in, but so far things initially seem like it is no more harmful than prior strains of covid:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/what-top-pediatricians-want-you-know-about-delta-variant-children-n1274536
"Dr. Jennifer Lighter, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at NYU Langone Health, said the delta variant, while it is "certainly more contagious," doesn't appear to be more dangerous to children than other variants. "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/07/22/covid-delta-variant-children/
"One bit of reassurance: Anecdotally, it looks like the illness caused by the delta variant is no more severe than that caused by the other variants so far, said Allison Bartlett, a pediatric infectious-disease specialist with University of Chicago Medicine.

right, just like Beta. Which everyone hyperventilated about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

I'm a guy? Neat.

You suggested I take or maybe stop taking Xanax, called a NYT article "poor" for no substantiated reason, created strawmen to support your arguments, and now are just reaching at personal attacks. You are just trying to smear anything that doesn't agree with your current belief about delta, but not offering any evidence to support the things you are saying.

I'll just peace out because I don't need to engage with your abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And as of yesterday's news, apparently, not just more kids ill, but kids more ill, as they've now established that delta causes more severe illness.

Please cite the link for delta causing more severe illness in children.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/07/29/cdc-mask-guidance/
More severe illness. It doesn't specify 'in children', it just implies 'in humans,' which children are.

If you read the myriad articles of the threats to delta IN CHILDREN, it does not reflect that. As we've witnessed, covid behave differently in kids, so saying that something happens "for humans" shouldn't immediately translate to kids. You should gain solace from that.

Solace from fact-twisting delusions? Is that like holistic self-hypnotherapy alternative to Xanax? I'll stay lucid, thank you.
It certainly does translate to children - there is absolutely nothing that shows otherwise.

"Overall the news is reassuring when it comes to children and the risks of serious complications from Covid-19. New research suggests the Delta variant may cause more serious illness in adults, but it’s not known if the variant puts children at greater risk of more serious illness. Compared to adults, children diagnosed with Covid-19 are more likely to have mild symptoms or none at all. Children are also far less likely to develop severe illness, be hospitalized or die from the disease. Out of about 3.5 million cases of Covid-19 in children in the United States, the National Center for Health Statistics has reported, as of July 28, that 519 children have died from Covid-19 (fewer than 0.015 percent), including 346 children 5 to 17 years of age, and 173 children 4 or younger. Children with underlying medical conditions are the most likely to be hospitalized. Black and Hispanic children also had higher rates of hospitalization, although overall risk remained low."


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/29/well/family/back-to-school-covid.html

Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

hate to burst your bubble, but research still consistently shows that transmission is very low in schools and kids don’t get very sick. the observation that kids are largely spared has been consistent from the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo... there is nothing that says that the increased virulence is magically restricted to adults.

Remember when we were reading that children could magically never be infected? Or be ill? Or when we read that they magically never could transmit?

This poor NYTimes article came out many long long hours before the WaPo game-changing article on CDC's new understanding of the pandemic.

No, no one said that children couldn't be infected or be ill or transmit. Yes, it is still true that children are less likely to get, be ill from, and (probably) transmit alpha covid.

Yes, delta is being shown to be more transmissible, and that is true for children, as reflected in the articles cited above.

No, you haven't seen anything that says that delta is worse than alpha for kids who contract it.

Yes, there are more cases of delta in children than alpha, because it is more transmissible. Yes, that means that the overall number of kids who get sick from covid (delta) will be higher.

Why don't we....idk....wait for data before losing our minds?

Ohh, you're *that* kind of guy.
The kind that denies the prior batch of untrue placating bullshit, feeds a new fresh heaping, and when that doesn't work, suggests we wait before losing our minds.

I think this previous quote puts it all in perspective:

Out of about 3.5 million cases of Covid-19 in children in the United States, the National Center for Health Statistics has reported, as of July 28, that 519 children have died from Covid-19 (fewer than 0.015 percent), including 346 children 5 to 17 years of age, and 173 children 4 or younger. Children with underlying medical conditions are the most likely to be hospitalized. Black and Hispanic children also had higher rates of hospitalization, although overall risk remained low."
...
"While any death of a child is devastating, it may help parents to think about other risks to childhood health compared to Covid-19. The C.D.C. estimates there were 480 deaths among children from influenza during the 2018-19 school year. Injury is the leading cause of death among children — about 12,000 children and young adults 1 to 19 years of age die in accidents each year, including more than 4,000 deaths in car crashes, 900 drowning accidents and 761 unintentional poisonings or drug overdoses.

good stats. makes me more likely to get covid vax for my 9 yr old (and continue to be completely paranoid about cars).

[Anonymous]

Schools will be open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, the FDA. Why are they asking this week? Why didn't they look at the study protocols in MARCH? This is going to set back approval. This lands on Biden. Zero urgency.


July 26 (Reuters) - U.S. regulators have asked Pfizer Inc -BioNTech and Moderna Inc to expand the size of ongoing trials testing their COVID-19 vaccines in children aged between five and 11, the New York Times reported on Monday.

The Food and Drug Administration has indicated that the current strength of the studies was inadequate to detect the rare side effects, including myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, an inflammation of the lining around the heart, the report said. (https://nyti.ms/3xgzuWZ)

The health regulator has asked the companies to include 3,000 children in their trials, almost double the original number of study participants, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter.

FDA, Pfizer and Moderna did not immediately respond to Reuters request for comment. (Reporting by Mrinalika Roy in Bengaluru; Editing by Shinjini Ganguli)

I have no problem with this. Why do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, the FDA. Why are they asking this week? Why didn't they look at the study protocols in MARCH? This is going to set back approval. This lands on Biden. Zero urgency.


July 26 (Reuters) - U.S. regulators have asked Pfizer Inc -BioNTech and Moderna Inc to expand the size of ongoing trials testing their COVID-19 vaccines in children aged between five and 11, the New York Times reported on Monday.

The Food and Drug Administration has indicated that the current strength of the studies was inadequate to detect the rare side effects, including myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, an inflammation of the lining around the heart, the report said. (https://nyti.ms/3xgzuWZ)

The health regulator has asked the companies to include 3,000 children in their trials, almost double the original number of study participants, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter.

FDA, Pfizer and Moderna did not immediately respond to Reuters request for comment. (Reporting by Mrinalika Roy in Bengaluru; Editing by Shinjini Ganguli)

I have no problem with this. Why do you?

Hey, if they expand the trials it'll give more people the opportunity to volunteer for them!

Seriously, I'm also glad this is happening. If it didn't happen you'd conceivably see a lot less choice to vax the young kids, if people believed the FDA to be ignoring concerns or rushing trials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am somewhat confident that we will not have to go to Plan B...but I am wavering a bit lately.

Plan B for us is to immediately go and rent a 2 BR apartment in the closest MD or VA district that is open, and my husband and I and our son will live there. We can handle a long commute for a year (no, we will not commit residency fraud and keep living in our DC house while we attend school elsewhere). DS is a senior in high school, and I am desperate for him to have one full, in-person year to finish it out.

Fairfax will be stay open because of the governor's race. The Republican candidate is running in part on a platform that schools need to be open. The democrat will lose if schools close. I bet Fairfax stays open through hell or high water this school year.

I never thought Republicans would show leadership on educational issues until this pandemic. (I still hope he loses, but glad he is putting this pressure on.)

LOL, that should tell you something about the wisdom of opening schools.

No, that tells me that even a blind chicken sometimes finds a seed.

And your response tells me that a big reason many liberals dug in on the school issue is their reflexive opposition to anything Republicans say.

LOL again. Nice try.
Do blind chicken pander for seeds?
I do not act on reflexive opposition to anything Republicans say. I generally ignore anything Republicans say, because they are speaking in reflexive opposition to anything Democrats say.

Sure you do.

I agree that Republicans mostly wanted schools to open for the wrong reasons. I am under no illusion that their motives were pure. But they were still right.

And nobody needed to listen to Republicans on this issue, because they were plenty of experts saying the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am somewhat confident that we will not have to go to Plan B...but I am wavering a bit lately.

Plan B for us is to immediately go and rent a 2 BR apartment in the closest MD or VA district that is open, and my husband and I and our son will live there. We can handle a long commute for a year (no, we will not commit residency fraud and keep living in our DC house while we attend school elsewhere). DS is a senior in high school, and I am desperate for him to have one full, in-person year to finish it out.

Fairfax will be stay open because of the governor's race. The Republican candidate is running in part on a platform that schools need to be open. The democrat will lose if schools close. I bet Fairfax stays open through hell or high water this school year.

I never thought Republicans would show leadership on educational issues until this pandemic. (I still hope he loses, but glad he is putting this pressure on.)

LOL, that should tell you something about the wisdom of opening schools.

No, that tells me that even a blind chicken sometimes finds a seed.

And your response tells me that a big reason many liberals dug in on the school issue is their reflexive opposition to anything Republicans say.

LOL again. Nice try.
Do blind chicken pander for seeds?
I do not act on reflexive opposition to anything Republicans say. I generally ignore anything Republicans say, because they are speaking in reflexive opposition to anything Democrats say.

Sure you do.

I agree that Republicans mostly wanted schools to open for the wrong reasons. I am under no illusion that their motives were pure. But they were still right.

And nobody needed to listen to Republicans on this issue, because they were plenty of experts saying the same thing.

*there not they

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, the FDA. Why are they asking this week? Why didn't they look at the study protocols in MARCH? This is going to set back approval. This lands on Biden. Zero urgency.


July 26 (Reuters) - U.S. regulators have asked Pfizer Inc -BioNTech and Moderna Inc to expand the size of ongoing trials testing their COVID-19 vaccines in children aged between five and 11, the New York Times reported on Monday.

The Food and Drug Administration has indicated that the current strength of the studies was inadequate to detect the rare side effects, including myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, an inflammation of the lining around the heart, the report said. (https://nyti.ms/3xgzuWZ)

The health regulator has asked the companies to include 3,000 children in their trials, almost double the original number of study participants, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter.

FDA, Pfizer and Moderna did not immediately respond to Reuters request for comment. (Reporting by Mrinalika Roy in Bengaluru; Editing by Shinjini Ganguli)

Probably because the myocarditis didn't start getting reported in large enough numbers for them to think it needed to be looked at until after March? The silver lining of the new info on the delta variant, though, is that the risk/benefit calculation on vaccinating under 12 kids changes; if it's really much more contagious, the upside of vaccinating kids looks a little better compared to the (fairly small) risk of side effects from the shot. Even if kids still have pretty low risks of bad outcomes from covid itself.

That is not how drug/vaccinations get approved. The benefits have to outweigh the risks FOR THE PERSON BEING TREATED, i.e. children.