Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.houstonpress.com/news/at-texas-childrens-some-kids-with-covid-need-ventilators-11610665

https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/atlanta-school-quarantines-more-than-100-students-in-first-week-of-classes/C36L5A6RUJCQFLSS3JLU4LDBXE/

Edited to add:
This is what concerns me:

"Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic, Pathologist-in-Chief and Interim Pediatrician-in-Chief at Texas Children’s Hospital, “and roughly one-third of those may require critical care.”

Among those children who need critical care, “some have required ventilator support,” Versalovic told the Houston Press. “We have seen severe cases of COVID pneumonia and acute respiratory distress in children. And we certainly have used ventilators when appropriate, selectively.” "

Almost all of these kids are medically complicated. Look at the literature. You're talking about kids with tracheas, g-tubes, currently in cancer treatment, etc. And, even then, the death rate is vanishingly low. One single kid in TX (ONE) died of MIS-C; that's actually fewer kids than died form MIS-C NOT associated with COVID. It's fewer kids than died from winter storms in Texas last year. All of this is readily confirmable at :https://www.dshs.texas.gov/. The hysteria is not helpful.

I don’t see what you said in the article about medical complications in the article. I saw that 10 percent of positives were hospitalizations. And out of that 1/2 of the kids were in the ICU and some of those need ventilators. The kids may not have died but while a poster was sarcastic about long covid, I am sure these kids have a long recovery ahead. If hospitals in other area are starting to get filled up, it is only a matter of time a high tourist place like DC will see the same. And as we read in the Washington Post article, vaccinated people can not only be break through and can act as carriers.

For those of us with kids too young to get the vaccine, we have to follow more than the death statistics.

If you're following the data that closely then you're going to need to actually become more sophisticated about it. "10 percent of positives were hospitalizations" does NOT mean that kids have a 10% chance of being hospitalized if they get covid. That figure likely covers only children sick enough to present to the hospital, and so it excludes all the mild and asymptomatic cases. It may also include kids who tested positive for covid, but were not actually hospitalized FOR covid (caught on routine screening.)

Yes. The article explicitly says this: "Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic".

This does NOT translate to a 10% hospitalization rate for kids at large.

What percent of the kids are positive? Because if only 10% are positive then 10% of that 10% is a pretty small number.

Yes, that is an important piece of information that they omit. How many of the kids who came in with respiratory illness actually had Covid vs RSV or some other virus?

And that's only the population showing up at the hospital there are probably other kids who are positive but recovering at home without incident.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Fairfax County, parents had to apply for a virtual “academy” and provide medical documentation that their child could not attend in person. They will not be taught by teachers from their neighborhood school, but by teachers that are hired specifically for this virtual academy. If approved, they are locked into the virtual academy until the halfway point of the school year.

In a school system of over 180K students, there are under 1000 that have been accepted grade K-12.

DC has one. In a school system of 51k students, hey've accepted 19 students and rejected 19.

That isn't what OP is asking for. We want something that bridges the gap to the vaccine, creates a structure for the inevitable back-and-forth to virtual for those families who prefer in-person, and maintains the belonging to their own school community.

And people in hell want ice water. How is any school administrator supposed to plan for what you’re asking for?

This is a gift to school administrator. Reducing the in-classroom cohort size, from self-selecting families, reduces the risk of outbreaks. Having some virtual kids ensures the structure is in place and there is no scrambling at the quarantine transitions.

NO IT IS NOT. You seem to think that teachers grow on trees and that staffing is fluid and flexible. You seem to think that no planning is involved. Do you have a job that requires any thinking or large scale planning?

Go back to the post above with the first grade classroom example. Answer that and then we’ll talk.

Concurrent.

Simulcast is AWFUL. Teachers despise it as do kids. In my son's PK3, kids watching from home regularly cried about having to see their friends interacting in the classroom with their teacher. It was heartbreaking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.houstonpress.com/news/at-texas-childrens-some-kids-with-covid-need-ventilators-11610665

https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/atlanta-school-quarantines-more-than-100-students-in-first-week-of-classes/C36L5A6RUJCQFLSS3JLU4LDBXE/

Edited to add:
This is what concerns me:

"Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic, Pathologist-in-Chief and Interim Pediatrician-in-Chief at Texas Children’s Hospital, “and roughly one-third of those may require critical care.”

Among those children who need critical care, “some have required ventilator support,” Versalovic told the Houston Press. “We have seen severe cases of COVID pneumonia and acute respiratory distress in children. And we certainly have used ventilators when appropriate, selectively.” "

Almost all of these kids are medically complicated. Look at the literature. You're talking about kids with tracheas, g-tubes, currently in cancer treatment, etc. And, even then, the death rate is vanishingly low. One single kid in TX (ONE) died of MIS-C; that's actually fewer kids than died form MIS-C NOT associated with COVID. It's fewer kids than died from winter storms in Texas last year. All of this is readily confirmable at :https://www.dshs.texas.gov/. The hysteria is not helpful.

I don’t see what you said in the article about medical complications in the article. I saw that 10 percent of positives were hospitalizations. And out of that 1/2 of the kids were in the ICU and some of those need ventilators. The kids may not have died but while a poster was sarcastic about long covid, I am sure these kids have a long recovery ahead. If hospitals in other area are starting to get filled up, it is only a matter of time a high tourist place like DC will see the same. And as we read in the Washington Post article, vaccinated people can not only be break through and can act as carriers.

For those of us with kids too young to get the vaccine, we have to follow more than the death statistics.

If you're following the data that closely then you're going to need to actually become more sophisticated about it. "10 percent of positives were hospitalizations" does NOT mean that kids have a 10% chance of being hospitalized if they get covid. That figure likely covers only children sick enough to present to the hospital, and so it excludes all the mild and asymptomatic cases. It may also include kids who tested positive for covid, but were not actually hospitalized FOR covid (caught on routine screening.)

Yes. The article explicitly says this: "Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic".

This does NOT translate to a 10% hospitalization rate for kids at large.

What percent of the kids are positive? Because if only 10% are positive then 10% of that 10% is a pretty small number.

Yes, that is an important piece of information that they omit. How many of the kids who came in with respiratory illness actually had Covid vs RSV or some other virus?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.houstonpress.com/news/at-texas-childrens-some-kids-with-covid-need-ventilators-11610665

https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/atlanta-school-quarantines-more-than-100-students-in-first-week-of-classes/C36L5A6RUJCQFLSS3JLU4LDBXE/

Edited to add:
This is what concerns me:

"Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic, Pathologist-in-Chief and Interim Pediatrician-in-Chief at Texas Children’s Hospital, “and roughly one-third of those may require critical care.”

Among those children who need critical care, “some have required ventilator support,” Versalovic told the Houston Press. “We have seen severe cases of COVID pneumonia and acute respiratory distress in children. And we certainly have used ventilators when appropriate, selectively.” "

Almost all of these kids are medically complicated. Look at the literature. You're talking about kids with tracheas, g-tubes, currently in cancer treatment, etc. And, even then, the death rate is vanishingly low. One single kid in TX (ONE) died of MIS-C; that's actually fewer kids than died form MIS-C NOT associated with COVID. It's fewer kids than died from winter storms in Texas last year. All of this is readily confirmable at :https://www.dshs.texas.gov/. The hysteria is not helpful.

I don’t see what you said in the article about medical complications in the article. I saw that 10 percent of positives were hospitalizations. And out of that 1/2 of the kids were in the ICU and some of those need ventilators. The kids may not have died but while a poster was sarcastic about long covid, I am sure these kids have a long recovery ahead. If hospitals in other area are starting to get filled up, it is only a matter of time a high tourist place like DC will see the same. And as we read in the Washington Post article, vaccinated people can not only be break through and can act as carriers.

For those of us with kids too young to get the vaccine, we have to follow more than the death statistics.

If you're following the data that closely then you're going to need to actually become more sophisticated about it. "10 percent of positives were hospitalizations" does NOT mean that kids have a 10% chance of being hospitalized if they get covid. That figure likely covers only children sick enough to present to the hospital, and so it excludes all the mild and asymptomatic cases. It may also include kids who tested positive for covid, but were not actually hospitalized FOR covid (caught on routine screening.)

Yes. The article explicitly says this: "Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic".

This does NOT translate to a 10% hospitalization rate for kids at large.

What percent of the kids are positive? Because if only 10% are positive then 10% of that 10% is a pretty small number.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.houstonpress.com/news/at-texas-childrens-some-kids-with-covid-need-ventilators-11610665

https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/atlanta-school-quarantines-more-than-100-students-in-first-week-of-classes/C36L5A6RUJCQFLSS3JLU4LDBXE/

Edited to add:
This is what concerns me:

"Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic, Pathologist-in-Chief and Interim Pediatrician-in-Chief at Texas Children’s Hospital, “and roughly one-third of those may require critical care.”

Among those children who need critical care, “some have required ventilator support,” Versalovic told the Houston Press. “We have seen severe cases of COVID pneumonia and acute respiratory distress in children. And we certainly have used ventilators when appropriate, selectively.” "

Almost all of these kids are medically complicated. Look at the literature. You're talking about kids with tracheas, g-tubes, currently in cancer treatment, etc. And, even then, the death rate is vanishingly low. One single kid in TX (ONE) died of MIS-C; that's actually fewer kids than died form MIS-C NOT associated with COVID. It's fewer kids than died from winter storms in Texas last year. All of this is readily confirmable at :https://www.dshs.texas.gov/. The hysteria is not helpful.

I don’t see what you said in the article about medical complications in the article. I saw that 10 percent of positives were hospitalizations. And out of that 1/2 of the kids were in the ICU and some of those need ventilators. The kids may not have died but while a poster was sarcastic about long covid, I am sure these kids have a long recovery ahead. If hospitals in other area are starting to get filled up, it is only a matter of time a high tourist place like DC will see the same. And as we read in the Washington Post article, vaccinated people can not only be break through and can act as carriers.

For those of us with kids too young to get the vaccine, we have to follow more than the death statistics.

If you're following the data that closely then you're going to need to actually become more sophisticated about it. "10 percent of positives were hospitalizations" does NOT mean that kids have a 10% chance of being hospitalized if they get covid. That figure likely covers only children sick enough to present to the hospital, and so it excludes all the mild and asymptomatic cases. It may also include kids who tested positive for covid, but were not actually hospitalized FOR covid (caught on routine screening.)

Yes. The article explicitly says this: "Out of all the kids who show up to Texas Children’s concerned they may have COVID-19, “Currently, roughly 10 percent of those children who test positive do require hospitalization,” said Dr. Jim Versalovic".

This does NOT translate to a 10% hospitalization rate for kids at large.

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for explaining in a civil tone and kindly. It helps me get more informed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also - the large (if not overwhelming) majority of the kids hospitalized for covid are going to have severe comorbidities like tracheostomies. This does not mean we don't care about them; but it does mean that you need to do a little more thinking about the risk to your own child.

Different PP. Wait what about tracheostomies? Are you saying kids hospitalized for covid might receive a tracheostomy, or that a lot of the kids hospitalized for covid had had a tracheostomy before getting covid?

Anonymous wrote:Pediatric Delta Covid cases looking more virulent: https://twitter.com/heather_haq/status/1421287982414409730?s=21

Anonymous wrote:
Also - the large (if not overwhelming) majority of the kids hospitalized for covid are going to have severe comorbidities like tracheostomies. This does not mean we don't care about them; but it does mean that you need to do a little more thinking about the risk to your own child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ridiculous. DCPS only needs to offer/host/launch one virtual school (or better, contract with a company that does this well because that’s all they do). Want virtual? Sign your child up for that school and give up your rights to whatever in-person school you attended previously. It’s absurd to expect every individual school to divvy up its budget between inperson and virtual and expect to do it all well.

Yes - there are parents freaking out and want online school, but they have to give up that they will be connected to their specific school. That connection just makes things worse for everyone students and teachers. Maybe DC could contract with virtual Virginia to give families that option if they want it, but definitely not connected to specific DC schools.

DC won’t do an open enrollment virtual school. Too many kids did not attend virtual school last year and they won’t let parents make that choice because too many parents would choose it and use it as an excuse to not get their kids up and to school. It sounds harsh but it’s the reality.

+1

Not all parents make the best choices for their kids. And as this thread shows, that includes UMC parents.[/quote

Oh you mean the ones who don’t care if their child gets COVID? Agreed.

Guessing, but PP may have meant putting their child's education FIRST after weighing real Covid health vs education loss risks. Parents of children who do not value education are now behind 5-7 months and that gap will widen if education remains last.