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

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

I know Dr. Kline is talking about the number of pediatric ICU patients increasing in recent weeks in New Orleans.  Certainly that is troubling.  It's not evidence, though, that there is a relevant increase in virulence.  It still might be evidence that covid is more transmissible (more cases x same virulence = more hospitalizations).

Here's many articles that suggest otherwise, including ones looking at delta in UK:  https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/990789.page
[/quote]
I'm having a hard time finding scientific articles in that thread.
I see NYTimes, Slate, Guardian, DW, nbc news, npr, time, fortune,
Forbes (admittedly it does discuss an AAP report that states that the last week has added 77,000 seventy-seven thousand more positive children),

[b]BMJ is a medical journal, but the link is to an editorial form mid-June that says 'nothing to see here, most kids coming into the hospital with covid are coming i for broken bones' [/b]- contrast that with Dr. Kline's statement, or today's statement by the Surgeon General.
A lot of posters' opinions minimizing the threat, then it's kid vaccine hesitancy. 
You demand a LOT of support to posters' statements (and to statements posters haven't made "prove delta is worse in kids than in adults!") but that linked thread....  [/quote]

Wait are you saying you are more inclined to listen to Dr. Kline's interview statements than an editorial in BMJ with citations? Having been involved in writing editorials for major journals in other disciplines, like Nature, I can tell you that they don't just let anyone write, and there is a review process.[/quote]

There have been plenty of instances of prestigious medical journals publishing editorials that did not age well. This one is less than 8 weeks old, and it isn't aging well. [/quote]

just because you don't like it...[/quote]
No, not just because I don't like it. Just because exactly the week it was published, kids hospitalizations in the UK exploded, up and up for 6+ weeks, and have only started to come down in the past week because schools closed for the summer. Here, we are seeing cases exploding, hospitalizations rising, and we haven't opened schools yet. 
[twitter]https://twitter.com/jneill/status/1422215765734875139?s=20[/twitter][/quote]

1. You are still quoting Long Covid Kids
2. We need to see the data or the reports these were taken from
3. Really lacking denominators here.[/quote]

Raw data from NHS that is used for these figures.
https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v2/data?areaType=nation&areaCode=E92000001&metric=newCasesBySpecimenDateAgeDemographics&format=csv

https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v2/data?areaType=nation&areaCode=E92000001&metric=cumAdmissionsByAge&format=csv
[/quote]

Ah completely decontextualized. I am sure that you have definitely done your own statistical analysis. You don't fool anyone by simply spitting out links that mean nothing to you.[/quote]

just ignore the pp and stop arguing with them. at this point its clear they dont even know what they're citing[/quote]

I don't think they even opened the links. If so, they'd know that there's nothing we can draw on from here. It doesn't make any case without the program.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics