Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All DC government employees (including teachers) are being trained as contact tracers. I’m unsure how teachers would even have time for this but We are required to take the training.

I have also found this odd. Are they considering having us spend part of our teaching time instead contact tracing? Very strange.

I’m a dc gov employee and was wondering why we have to take an online mandatory contact tracing class. I think they are having a rd time hiring more and would prefer to reassign existing employees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All DC government employees (including teachers) are being trained as contact tracers. I’m unsure how teachers would even have time for this but We are required to take the training.

I have also found this odd. Are they considering having us spend part of our teaching time instead contact tracing? Very strange.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All DC government employees (including teachers) are being trained as contact tracers. I’m unsure how teachers would even have time for this but We are required to take the training.

I have also found this odd. Are they considering having us spend part of our teaching time instead contact tracing? Very strange.

I think it’s a numbers game. Look at this!! We have 5,0000 contract tracers!!!! See how safe you are?

Anonymous wrote:All DC government employees (including teachers) are being trained as contact tracers. I’m unsure how teachers would even have time for this but We are required to take the training.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All DC government employees (including teachers) are being trained as contact tracers. I’m unsure how teachers would even have time for this but We are required to take the training.

I have also found this odd. Are they considering having us spend part of our teaching time instead contact tracing? Very strange.

Anonymous wrote:All DC government employees (including teachers) are being trained as contact tracers. I’m unsure how teachers would even have time for this but We are required to take the training.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2020/06/12/teachers-face-a-summer-of-soul-searching-what-do-they-do-in-the-fall/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d certainly hope that it goes back to normal this fall. Taking precautions, sure. But not sure why the US schools need to be different than the rest of the world, as everyone else is re-opening their schools fully.

Pretty much every other developed country has much lower rates of infection than us by now. As do many less-developed countries.

Anonymous wrote:I’d certainly hope that it goes back to normal this fall. Taking precautions, sure. But not sure why the US schools need to be different than the rest of the world, as everyone else is re-opening their schools fully.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect schools will be open this fall as normal. Rightly or wrongly, the world is moving on. By August, I bet coronavirus will not get nearly the same attention is does now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/politics/coronavirus-washington-trump.html

This is because it is summer. People are outside a lot more which helps limit the spread. If we look at Fauci’s statements, and the history of the Spanish flu, once the weather gets cooler things will change. Being in a school, let alone a tiny classroom with almost 30 kids, is a recipe for disaster. We don’t all teach young children. My students are 17-18 years old, nothing says they can’t spread the virus like a typical adult.

Summer weather doesn’t last forever. We have to think about the full year, not just right now. Health always always always needs to come first!

But Covid doesn't kill like the Spanish flu. It kills mostly people over 65. For the vast majority of younger people, the risk is minuscule. That is a scientific fact. When you weigh the education of millions against the health concerns of a small minority, it is not obvious that health must come first. We need to make accommodations for those at risk while recognizing the essential importance of education for millions of kids.

Please stop spreading false facts. You do not have to be old, you can be 30 and die. If you are overweight (which many Americans are), have Diabetes, etc. you have a much higher risk. That is a scientific fact.

For people under 30, the risk is lower than from the regular flu. BY A LOT. For kids under 18, they have a higher risk of being hospitalized as a result of NOROVIRUS (i.e., the regular old stomach bug) than COVID. This is not dangerous for kids. To the extent we're locking down, it is for vulnerable populations, but let's not pretend we aren't making kids and young workers bear the brunt of the costs while AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT POPULATION is the most at risk (and, in the case of retired folks, BY FAR THE LEAST AFFECTED economically).

Not true, especially not for babies under 1. 11% of babies under 1 will become critical if contracted. 7% of 1-4 year olds will be critical and 4% of 5+ children. Think about the huge number of kids in schools. That translates into a lot of hospitalized critical kids. Even if the death rate is super low, i don’t want what I consider a pretty significant chance of my two young kids and infant being hospitalized and in critical condition.

You're numbers are way off:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covid-net/purpose-methods.html

Look at the hospitalization rates for kids. It's minuscule. We can't keep making policy decisions impacting 99.9% of folks to potentially/maybe reduce impact on the .1%

https://www.aappublications.org/news/2020/03/16/coronavirus031620

“ The study also found infants had higher rates of serious illness than older children. Just under 11% of infants had severe or critical cases compared to 7% of children ages 1-5, 4% of those 6-10, 4% of those 11-15 and 3% of those 16 and older.”

I wonder if you actually read the link. This was way back in March and only a subset of children in China. Totally unclear how they got these cases, but not randomly sampled. One listed limitation was that many of the most serious cases were never confirmed to be COVID and could have been something else. Many many more recent studies have contradicted these numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect schools will be open this fall as normal. Rightly or wrongly, the world is moving on. By August, I bet coronavirus will not get nearly the same attention is does now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/politics/coronavirus-washington-trump.html

This is because it is summer. People are outside a lot more which helps limit the spread. If we look at Fauci’s statements, and the history of the Spanish flu, once the weather gets cooler things will change. Being in a school, let alone a tiny classroom with almost 30 kids, is a recipe for disaster. We don’t all teach young children. My students are 17-18 years old, nothing says they can’t spread the virus like a typical adult.

Summer weather doesn’t last forever. We have to think about the full year, not just right now. Health always always always needs to come first!

But Covid doesn't kill like the Spanish flu. It kills mostly people over 65. For the vast majority of younger people, the risk is minuscule. That is a scientific fact. When you weigh the education of millions against the health concerns of a small minority, it is not obvious that health must come first. We need to make accommodations for those at risk while recognizing the essential importance of education for millions of kids.

Please stop spreading false facts. You do not have to be old, you can be 30 and die. If you are overweight (which many Americans are), have Diabetes, etc. you have a much higher risk. That is a scientific fact.

For people under 30, the risk is lower than from the regular flu. BY A LOT. For kids under 18, they have a higher risk of being hospitalized as a result of NOROVIRUS (i.e., the regular old stomach bug) than COVID. This is not dangerous for kids. To the extent we're locking down, it is for vulnerable populations, but let's not pretend we aren't making kids and young workers bear the brunt of the costs while AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT POPULATION is the most at risk (and, in the case of retired folks, BY FAR THE LEAST AFFECTED economically).

Not true, especially not for babies under 1. 11% of babies under 1 will become critical if contracted. 7% of 1-4 year olds will be critical and 4% of 5+ children. Think about the huge number of kids in schools. That translates into a lot of hospitalized critical kids. Even if the death rate is super low, i don’t want what I consider a pretty significant chance of my two young kids and infant being hospitalized and in critical condition.

You're numbers are way off:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covid-net/purpose-methods.html

Look at the hospitalization rates for kids. It's minuscule. We can't keep making policy decisions impacting 99.9% of folks to potentially/maybe reduce impact on the .1%

https://www.aappublications.org/news/2020/03/16/coronavirus031620

“ The study also found infants had higher rates of serious illness than older children. Just under 11% of infants had severe or critical cases compared to 7% of children ages 1-5, 4% of those 6-10, 4% of those 11-15 and 3% of those 16 and older.”