Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.
When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is no evidence of kids acting as super spreaders or even getting their family members sick!
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
So you are saying you have no evidence and are guessing. But that we should just believe you?
Anonymous wrote:We are hearing that it won't be one day on, one day off, but more like one week on (or even several weeks on) and then several weeks at home.
But still too early to have anything written officially.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.
When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.
How would you usefully implement a "pervasive testing protocol"? A person who is virus-free one day could be infected the next, and daily testing seems impractical.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.
When we have a pervasive testing protocol, we can re-open more fully. We don't. So it's not safe to.
Anonymous wrote:
I was a new poster, if Washington DC wants to take an extra special extremely risk averse approach to reopening schools based on only one variable that is a big mistake and close minded. Most other countries and states are already assessing the big picture and using updated virus data. The big picture is uglier than only the covid picture. Many country leaders have given direct speeches on tackling the recession and reopening over the last two weeks, including most European prime ministers, and Asia counties. Most societies want to come up with good ways to make it happen. Here people seem to like to come up with speculative scenarios to not reopen much, only weighting or thinking about one factor of many.
Anonymous wrote:I think the research on super spreaders is interesting. 70% of positive people infect NO other people.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good idea for what?
Kids’ education?
Kids’ socialization?
Kids’ communication skills?
Kids’ eyesight?
Kids’ exercise?
Parents’ job security?
Parents’ job productivity?
Parents’ employer existence?
National economy?
People’s compensation? (Which will easily be re-rates down further if these serious supply and demand shutdowns continue)
You're getting closer to a reasonable argument. I would have respected you more if you'd started with this rather than trying to dismiss the virus as a hoax. Here's the deal: the only way we have of controlling the virus is by limiting interpersonal contact. The virus is highly contagious, and in unrestricted populations it spreads quite quickly. In early March we were seeing spread rates where each infected person was infecting on average 2 or 3 other people, and the number of cases was doubling every 3 or 4 days. If that were left unchecked millions of people in the US would die. Through social distancing and hygiene measures we've managed to cut the spread rate to where the infection rate shrunk for a while. Now it's on to reopening, where the calculus is that we can tolerate a slightly higher spread rate in return for loosening some of the social distancing.
This is where your point comes in. OK, if we can loosen some of the social distancing, who decides which ones and how? Obviously to you getting the schools running at capacity is very important. If we have a limited number of reopening bullets to fire, shouldn't we be firing them at schools? That's a matter of opinion, there is no right or wrong answer. But where it gets interesting is the question of who makes the decision. Because the schools, and especially the private schools, aren't in a position to be deciding much at all. The health authorities are setting the guidelines, and as far as I can tell every school is going to do the absolute most they're allowed under the guidelines. It's certainly not a case of the schools not wanting to reopen fully.
So don't get mad at the schools.
Anonymous wrote:Good idea for what?
Kids’ education?
Kids’ socialization?
Kids’ communication skills?
Kids’ eyesight?
Kids’ exercise?
Parents’ job security?
Parents’ job productivity?
Parents’ employer existence?
National economy?
People’s compensation? (Which will easily be re-rates down further if these serious supply and demand shutdowns continue)