Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China
Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.
https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html
Let's assume at a school like Wilson each kid comes in contact with 100 people each day. So a 3% transmission rate means one infected kid infects three other people. If they start with a 0.8% infection rate that's 16 kids on the first day. Then they infect 48 more and that's 64. Then those 64 infect 192 more and it's 256. If they don't shut the school it doesn't take long before everyone in the school has it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China
Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.
https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html
Let's assume at a school like Wilson each kid comes in contact with 100 people each day. So a 3% transmission rate means one infected kid infects three other people. If they start with a 0.8% infection rate that's 16 kids on the first day. Then they infect 48 more and that's 64. Then those 64 infect 192 more and it's 256. If they don't shut the school it doesn't take long before everyone in the school has it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China
Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.
https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sounds pretty low-risk.
Are you kidding me? That’s a shit-ton.
On what planet is 0.08% a shit ton of anything?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China
Not really. Researchers say with face masks, the chance of infection or transmission is only 3%. Without masks it rises to 17%--still far from a sure thing.
https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Why do you assume a child will diligently keep on a mask?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
You're right. Let's run an experiment. What's the worst that could happen?
Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Good probability they will infect other kids or teacher esp if 10 years or older. In addition, the greatest risk of infection is to other family members, kids bringing it home. That is what I read somewhere was the highest percentage of transmission of infection in China
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
What is far from a given is that masks will be worn at all times and correctly, and that social distancing will be even possible. You're not supposed to base public policy on everything going perfectly. Predictable misuse and failures are supposed to be factored in. It's the responsible position.
Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.
Anonymous wrote:But isn't DCPS online?
Anonymous wrote:Why does everyone assume a masked kid who is infected will infect other kids or teachers who are also masked and presumably, socially-distanced? This is far from a given.