We just heard from our ES. 4 classes were sent home today. One symptom was a sneeze and another was a headache.

They also mentioned that they will have access to rapid tests next week and will administer them to "symptomatic" students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.

Not a TogetherAgain person, but performing medical tests on a minor without the consent of the guardian is pretty sketchy.

I would hope people would opt-in. But we can't lose sight of our ethics and morality.

You definitely need consent.

Silence is not consent

They’ve done it in DC

That doesn't make it ethical or right.

It's wrong to conduct a test on a minor without the parent's consent.

These things matter, even in a pandemic

No, it’s actually the right thing to do in a pandemic where others are placed into contact with you via something other than their own free choice (which is the nature of public education generally, more so with no virtual option available).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my. So now I’m hearing the outdoor lunch people are advocating for opt-out surveillance testing to nip a symptomatic spread in the bud, the togetheragain people want to keep surveillance testing opt out (so they can opt out: don’t ask don’t tell), and everyone wants rapid testing for kids with a “symptom” so we can all avoid the whole class quarantine. And MCPS just wants to send everyone home to fend for themselves. Is that where we are, friends?

I’m a together again person (at least in that I follow the group) and I’m in favor of opt out. The biggest issue though is testing symptomatic kids instead of sending them home.

+1

Also, "Together Again" is not a monolith, no matter what fiction people who aren't in the group want to tell themselves. Generally, the group is more focused on the needs of children and on broader risks to them beyond COVID than other groups I'm in (MCCPTA, for example).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.

Not a TogetherAgain person, but performing medical tests on a minor without the consent of the guardian is pretty sketchy.

I would hope people would opt-in. But we can't lose sight of our ethics and morality.

You definitely need consent.

Silence is not consent

They’ve done it in DC

That doesn't make it ethical or right.

It's wrong to conduct a test on a minor without the parent's consent.

These things matter, even in a pandemic

MCCPTA is reporting that MCPS are going to clarify the policy and to test symptomatic children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.

Not a TogetherAgain person, but performing medical tests on a minor without the consent of the guardian is pretty sketchy.

I would hope people would opt-in. But we can't lose sight of our ethics and morality.

You definitely need consent.

Silence is not consent

They’ve done it in DC

Anonymous wrote:Oh my. So now I’m hearing the outdoor lunch people are advocating for opt-out surveillance testing to nip a symptomatic spread in the bud, the togetheragain people want to keep surveillance testing opt out (so they can opt out: don’t ask don’t tell), and everyone wants rapid testing for kids with a “symptom” so we can all avoid the whole class quarantine. And MCPS just wants to send everyone home to fend for themselves. Is that where we are, friends?

I’m a together again person (at least in that I follow the group) and I’m in favor of opt out. The biggest issue though is testing symptomatic kids instead of sending them home.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has already asked the county council to clarify the quarantine guidance because it is so out of step with the CDC and the rest of the country (and probably the world). Per Hucker a meeting is scheduled for September 24, where DHHS, CC, and Dr. McKnight will figure out how this craziness came about. The state and county is offering rapid tests to MCPS. Apparently, MCPS did not even ask and pretended that there are no tests. Everyone knows that the policy came straight from Dr Gayles. His last day is September 12 so they scheduled the meeting for September 13.

This is encouraging, thank you.

Did MCPS ask for this meeting, or did the County Council (after numerous phone calls, tweets, and emails from the community)?

The council did

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And here is an interview with Gayles where he says that kids should NOT be quarantined for a single symptom https://www.google.com/amp/s/wtop.com/montgomery-county/2021/09/montgomery-county-health-officer-reflects-on-the-pandemic-and-his-new-job/amp/ in his own words
“I want folks at home to understand that, you know, we’re not arbitrarily giving out guidance to send kids home based upon, you know, one symptom. It is a total picture and assessment.”

I was expecting this to be from several months ago but the article was published yesterday. WTF! That's exactly what they are doing.

WTF????!!!

Together again wants a test to stay policy. Stop misinforming people.

From what I can see on Twitter, the Together Again people seem to want more testing. They are pushing MCPS to have rapid tests, for example. And they are the ones who connected with the Governor to confirm that MCPS can get rapid tests from them, which MCPS apparently did not realize. They also want to create incentives for people to opt into testing, for example through test-and-stay, which Massachusetts has in place.

You are correct that they do not support opt-out from an informed consent standpoint. But they support creating a system to encourage people to opt in.

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.

Not a TogetherAgain person, but performing medical tests on a minor without the consent of the guardian is pretty sketchy.

I would hope people would opt-in. But we can't lose sight of our ethics and morality.

You definitely need consent.

Silence is not consent

Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.

Oh my. So now I’m hearing the outdoor lunch people are advocating for opt-out surveillance testing to nip a symptomatic spread in the bud, the togetheragain people want to keep surveillance testing opt out (so they can opt out: don’t ask don’t tell), and everyone wants rapid testing for kids with a “symptom” so we can all avoid the whole class quarantine. And MCPS just wants to send everyone home to fend for themselves. Is that where we are, friends?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think MCPS is being over cautious, but in the name of trying to avoid a systemwide shutdown.

Why would there be a systemwide shutdown?

It’s spreading at a lively clip.

Is it?

Montgomery County covid dashboard says:

92.51 new cases per 100,000 residents (seven-day average), declining
2.7% test positivity (seven-day average), declining
-7.6% change in cases compared to previous seven-day period (i.e., declining)
71.7% of hospital in patient beds occupied
74.0% of hospital ICU beds in use
8.8% of hospital beds occupied by patients with covid

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/data/#dashboard

Shhh....don't let facts get in the way of the narrative.

THE SKY IS FALLING!!

I was reading that some school districts in Texas are closing down if the test positivity rate goes above 5%. Obviously Texas is a different situation than us regarding mask use and vaccination, but I wonder how far away we might be from going to hybrid or virtual. The state has not released any metrics for this.