Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s more about DCPS saying they were going to do something, doing it for a week then not doing it anymore.

DCPS didn't decide not to do testing anymore. Rather we had snow days so no one was there to test on planned testing days. My kid just had a COVID test at school yesterday. Are you just trolling WTU sound bites?

No, I’m pointing out how DCPS rarely follows through with anything. But go about your merry way acting like everything is fine. By the way, guess we should believe DCPS did all those upgrades at Whittier and what happened today was a figment of the imagination, right?

Enough with the conspiracy theories, WTU troll. You indicated that DCPS did COVID testing for one week then stopped doing it. Your claim is false.

Can you comment about what happened at Whittier? Or don’t you know?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.

But if we don't see increased community transmission (and in fact continue to see decreased community transmission), what's that a data point for?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s more about DCPS saying they were going to do something, doing it for a week then not doing it anymore.

DCPS didn't decide not to do testing anymore. Rather we had snow days so no one was there to test on planned testing days. My kid just had a COVID test at school yesterday. Are you just trolling WTU sound bites?

No, I’m pointing out how DCPS rarely follows through with anything. But go about your merry way acting like everything is fine. By the way, guess we should believe DCPS did all those upgrades at Whittier and what happened today was a figment of the imagination, right?

Enough with the conspiracy theories, WTU troll. You indicated that DCPS did COVID testing for one week then stopped doing it. Your claim is false.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s more about DCPS saying they were going to do something, doing it for a week then not doing it anymore.

DCPS didn't decide not to do testing anymore. Rather we had snow days so no one was there to test on planned testing days. My kid just had a COVID test at school yesterday. Are you just trolling WTU sound bites?

No, I’m pointing out how DCPS rarely follows through with anything. But go about your merry way acting like everything is fine. By the way, guess we should believe DCPS did all those upgrades at Whittier and what happened today was a figment of the imagination, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.

And you are basing those claims on what...?

Hahahahahaha. The irony.
Every article I've read clamoring for reopening, or being used to clamor for reopening, is putting forward 'data' that looks like this and is not actually data at all.

No idea what articles you’ve read, but the ones I read don’t look like your post, and do link to actual data. Screaming and laughing and claiming otherwise isn’t making your post more convincing.

Go on and share a study with data on systematic asymptomatic testing of in-school students.

It hasn't been published as a study, but they actually did this in Massachusetts, as this article reports:

"The union also named a lack of asymptomatic testing for teachers as a major barrier to returning to in-person learning. To get kids back to school, we implemented such a routine testing plan, at great cost and logistical effort. We discovered that since testing began in January 2021, the positivity rate among teachers and staff has been approximately 0.15 percent — while cases were surging in the Boston metro area — and our contact tracing efforts have not identified any cases of in-building transmission."

https://www.vox.com/2021/2/15/22280763/kids-covid-vaccine-teachers-unions-schools-reopening-cdc

The article also references plenty of other evidence that indicates that with a few basic precautions, there is little transmission within schools. Broad, regular testing of all people within a school isn't the only way to assess the level and likelihood of in-school transmission. I'm sure that's not enough for you, but I'll take the analysis of an epidemiology professor and infectious-disease physician over that of a random DCUM anonymous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.

And you are basing those claims on what...?

Hahahahahaha. The irony.
Every article I've read clamoring for reopening, or being used to clamor for reopening, is putting forward 'data' that looks like this and is not actually data at all.

No idea what articles you’ve read, but the ones I read don’t look like your post, and do link to actual data. Screaming and laughing and claiming otherwise isn’t making your post more convincing.

Go on and share a study with data on systematic asymptomatic testing of in-school students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.

And you are basing those claims on what...?

Hahahahahaha. The irony.
Every article I've read clamoring for reopening, or being used to clamor for reopening, is putting forward 'data' that looks like this and is not actually data at all.

No idea what articles you’ve read, but the ones I read don’t look like your post, and do link to actual data. Screaming and laughing and claiming otherwise isn’t making your post more convincing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone who is back at person getting their own kid tested on a regular basis, outside of what the school is doing?

Yep. We are testing our kid every couple of weeks. There's a testing site close to the school, so it's pretty easy. My plan was to test on the weeks that the school didn't.

Thanks for doing your best to keep everyone safe.

Do you know the day your child is tested and get an email with the results?

Anonymous wrote:Our school told us about this in the meetings leading up to the first day back but nothing since then. We were supposed to be sent a permission form but nothing has come home and I assume they haven't tested the kids since they've been back. I'm pretty disappointed.

We were emailed the permission form, along with the daily symptom screening form.

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s more about DCPS saying they were going to do something, doing it for a week then not doing it anymore.

DCPS didn't decide not to do testing anymore. Rather we had snow days so no one was there to test on planned testing days. My kid just had a COVID test at school yesterday. Are you just trolling WTU sound bites?

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone who is back at person getting their own kid tested on a regular basis, outside of what the school is doing?

Yep. We are testing our kid every couple of weeks. There's a testing site close to the school, so it's pretty easy. My plan was to test on the weeks that the school didn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.

And you are basing those claims on what...?

Hahahahahaha. The irony.
Every article I've read clamoring for reopening, or being used to clamor for reopening, is putting forward 'data' that looks like this and is not actually data at all.

Is anyone who is back at person getting their own kid tested on a regular basis, outside of what the school is doing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.

And you are basing those claims on what...?

Anonymous wrote:Not totally sure this is a terrible problem for the whole system, anyway -- teachers and in-person staff, having been vaccinated, should be protected. So the risk is only to families of other in-person kids, who presumably were willing to take on some additional risk.

The risk is two-fold:
1. it's another faux-batch of "data" on schools being open, that is likely to be used like all the other faux data sources on schools opening, to screech that there is no in-school transmission.
2. The community at-large is at risk of seeing increased community transmission that we'll blame on whatever else.