Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Importantly, this is CDC guidance on 'close contacts' in k-12 settings. I imagine, like other surrounding school districts, this will soon be adopted by OSSE:

"Exception: In the K–12 indoor classroom setting, the close contact definition excludes students who were within 3 to 6 feet of an infected student (laboratory-confirmed or a clinically compatible illness) where
both students were engaged in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks; and
other K–12 school prevention strategies (such as universal and correct mask use, physical distancing, increased ventilation) were in place in the K–12 school setting."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/appendix.html#contact

Meaning the exposure quarantines wouldn't send the entire class home.

If children have 10min mask-free morning snack time in the classroom, and 20 mini mask-free lunch in the classroom, they did not engage is consistent use of well-fitting masks.
If children are wearing surgical masks, which by design are not well-fitting, or masks that frequently fall under their nose, they did not engage in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks.

Yeah, you can't expect perfect adhesion to the guidelines, and it unenforceable anyway. But we know that, and the CDC knows that.

If I was referring to perfect adhesion to the guidelines, I would have mentioned kids lifting their masks to scratch their faces or drink water.
What I described isn't imperfect adhesion to the guidelines, but potentially broad failures to even seek to follow the guidelines, that could be addressed by schools.

look, masks just are not magic in that way. A short lunch period is not a superspreader event.

With delta in a classroom of 25, sure it can be, even if they do the 'eating in two waves' thing, with every other kid and every other row.

please show me the research where a 20 minute unmasked lunch period is so consequential.

please Google fleeting + delta.

No no, link us to the research. You are doing the anti-vaxxer thing of saying "just google it."

You are doing the thing of demanding peer-reviewed published research on a topic that is too fresh for it.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Importantly, this is CDC guidance on 'close contacts' in k-12 settings. I imagine, like other surrounding school districts, this will soon be adopted by OSSE:

"Exception: In the K–12 indoor classroom setting, the close contact definition excludes students who were within 3 to 6 feet of an infected student (laboratory-confirmed or a clinically compatible illness) where
both students were engaged in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks; and
other K–12 school prevention strategies (such as universal and correct mask use, physical distancing, increased ventilation) were in place in the K–12 school setting."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/appendix.html#contact

Meaning the exposure quarantines wouldn't send the entire class home.

If children have 10min mask-free morning snack time in the classroom, and 20 mini mask-free lunch in the classroom, they did not engage is consistent use of well-fitting masks.
If children are wearing surgical masks, which by design are not well-fitting, or masks that frequently fall under their nose, they did not engage in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks.

Yeah, you can't expect perfect adhesion to the guidelines, and it unenforceable anyway. But we know that, and the CDC knows that.

If I was referring to perfect adhesion to the guidelines, I would have mentioned kids lifting their masks to scratch their faces or drink water.
What I described isn't imperfect adhesion to the guidelines, but potentially broad failures to even seek to follow the guidelines, that could be addressed by schools.

look, masks just are not magic in that way. A short lunch period is not a superspreader event.

With delta in a classroom of 25, sure it can be, even if they do the 'eating in two waves' thing, with every other kid and every other row.

please show me the research where a 20 minute unmasked lunch period is so consequential.

please Google fleeting + delta.

No no, link us to the research. You are doing the anti-vaxxer thing of saying "just google it."

You are doing the thing of demanding peer-reviewed published research on a topic that is too fresh for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cdc stated that the R0 of chicken pox is similar to the R0 of delta. That’s in no way suggesting that delta spreads in the same manner as chickenpox, as the chicken pox poster is alleging. It is indeed misrepresentative. It is indeed highly speculative of what would happen in schools.

The CDC puts that twice on one slide. The CDC chose to emphasize chicken pox as a comparator for the layman. In a graph, and in a box on the same slide: "Delta variant is as transmissible as: - Chicken Pox."
They are both transmissible via aerosols.
There is no misrepresentation or speculation there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Importantly, this is CDC guidance on 'close contacts' in k-12 settings. I imagine, like other surrounding school districts, this will soon be adopted by OSSE:

"Exception: In the K–12 indoor classroom setting, the close contact definition excludes students who were within 3 to 6 feet of an infected student (laboratory-confirmed or a clinically compatible illness) where
both students were engaged in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks; and
other K–12 school prevention strategies (such as universal and correct mask use, physical distancing, increased ventilation) were in place in the K–12 school setting."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/appendix.html#contact

Meaning the exposure quarantines wouldn't send the entire class home.

If children have 10min mask-free morning snack time in the classroom, and 20 mini mask-free lunch in the classroom, they did not engage is consistent use of well-fitting masks.
If children are wearing surgical masks, which by design are not well-fitting, or masks that frequently fall under their nose, they did not engage in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks.

Yeah, you can't expect perfect adhesion to the guidelines, and it unenforceable anyway. But we know that, and the CDC knows that.

If I was referring to perfect adhesion to the guidelines, I would have mentioned kids lifting their masks to scratch their faces or drink water.
What I described isn't imperfect adhesion to the guidelines, but potentially broad failures to even seek to follow the guidelines, that could be addressed by schools.

look, masks just are not magic in that way. A short lunch period is not a superspreader event.

With delta in a classroom of 25, sure it can be, even if they do the 'eating in two waves' thing, with every other kid and every other row.

please show me the research where a 20 minute unmasked lunch period is so consequential.

please Google fleeting + delta.

No no, link us to the research. You are doing the anti-vaxxer thing of saying "just google it."

You are doing the thing of demanding peer-reviewed published research on a topic that is too fresh for it.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Importantly, this is CDC guidance on 'close contacts' in k-12 settings. I imagine, like other surrounding school districts, this will soon be adopted by OSSE:

"Exception: In the K–12 indoor classroom setting, the close contact definition excludes students who were within 3 to 6 feet of an infected student (laboratory-confirmed or a clinically compatible illness) where
both students were engaged in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks; and
other K–12 school prevention strategies (such as universal and correct mask use, physical distancing, increased ventilation) were in place in the K–12 school setting."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/appendix.html#contact

Meaning the exposure quarantines wouldn't send the entire class home.

If children have 10min mask-free morning snack time in the classroom, and 20 mini mask-free lunch in the classroom, they did not engage is consistent use of well-fitting masks.
If children are wearing surgical masks, which by design are not well-fitting, or masks that frequently fall under their nose, they did not engage in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks.

Yeah, you can't expect perfect adhesion to the guidelines, and it unenforceable anyway. But we know that, and the CDC knows that.

If I was referring to perfect adhesion to the guidelines, I would have mentioned kids lifting their masks to scratch their faces or drink water.
What I described isn't imperfect adhesion to the guidelines, but potentially broad failures to even seek to follow the guidelines, that could be addressed by schools.

look, masks just are not magic in that way. A short lunch period is not a superspreader event.

With delta in a classroom of 25, sure it can be, even if they do the 'eating in two waves' thing, with every other kid and every other row.

please show me the research where a 20 minute unmasked lunch period is so consequential.

please Google fleeting + delta.

No no, link us to the research. You are doing the anti-vaxxer thing of saying "just google it."

You are doing the thing of demanding peer-reviewed published research on a topic that is too fresh for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Importantly, this is CDC guidance on 'close contacts' in k-12 settings. I imagine, like other surrounding school districts, this will soon be adopted by OSSE:

"Exception: In the K–12 indoor classroom setting, the close contact definition excludes students who were within 3 to 6 feet of an infected student (laboratory-confirmed or a clinically compatible illness) where
both students were engaged in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks; and
other K–12 school prevention strategies (such as universal and correct mask use, physical distancing, increased ventilation) were in place in the K–12 school setting."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/appendix.html#contact

Meaning the exposure quarantines wouldn't send the entire class home.

If children have 10min mask-free morning snack time in the classroom, and 20 mini mask-free lunch in the classroom, they did not engage is consistent use of well-fitting masks.
If children are wearing surgical masks, which by design are not well-fitting, or masks that frequently fall under their nose, they did not engage in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks.

Yeah, you can't expect perfect adhesion to the guidelines, and it unenforceable anyway. But we know that, and the CDC knows that.

If I was referring to perfect adhesion to the guidelines, I would have mentioned kids lifting their masks to scratch their faces or drink water.
What I described isn't imperfect adhesion to the guidelines, but potentially broad failures to even seek to follow the guidelines, that could be addressed by schools.

look, masks just are not magic in that way. A short lunch period is not a superspreader event.

With delta in a classroom of 25, sure it can be, even if they do the 'eating in two waves' thing, with every other kid and every other row.

please show me the research where a 20 minute unmasked lunch period is so consequential.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cdc stated that the R0 of chicken pox is similar to the R0 of delta. That’s in no way suggesting that delta spreads in the same manner as chickenpox, as the chicken pox poster is alleging. It is indeed misrepresentative. It is indeed highly speculative of what would happen in schools.

The CDC puts that twice on one slide. The CDC chose to emphasize chicken pox as a comparator for the layman. In a graph, and in a box on the same slide: "Delta variant is as transmissible as: - Chicken Pox."
They are both transmissible via aerosols.
There is no misrepresentation or speculation there.

Anonymous wrote:The cdc stated that the R0 of chicken pox is similar to the R0 of delta. That’s in no way suggesting that delta spreads in the same manner as chickenpox, as the chicken pox poster is alleging. It is indeed misrepresentative. It is indeed highly speculative of what would happen in schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The amount of crazy sh*t being posted on this thread is wild. Somebody REALLY wants to scare DCPS parents. Gross.

It's that flu bro mom that kept taunting me and taunting me "you don't even have science to support it! Give me the links, lady! You can't even have an informed conversation!" I promise I didn't even *want* to go dig out a 1982 Pediatrics study. It is crazy relevant, and I'm more scared than I was before I found it.

Let me get this straight. A 40-year old article you googled, that is a retrospective study of 8 cases, in a completely different setting than schools, with no information about time of exposures, ABOUT A TOTALLY DIFFERENT VIRUS ... is "crazy relevant" to 20-minute school lunches? More relevant than the CDC? More than the NYTimes?

How about you just read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/29/well/family/back-to-school-covid.html

1. I didn't google it, I searched PubMed, because you were taunting me to start a science fight.
2. you continue to use all caps for the fact that it's a different virus, but the CDC (citation linked above) has stated delta is as contagious as chicken pox, so a study of a chicken pox outbreak is relevant.
3. You're wildly unreasonable (uninformed? Intellectually dishonest? Who knows) to reject a a '40 year old' study published in Pediatrics. Air microbiology and the laws of physics haven't changed.
4. Um, yeah, more relevant that the NYTimes, which I love and respect.

You think this is a "science fight"? Ok. I have tried to get Jeff to delete your post as wildly speculative/verging on deliberately misleading, but looks like he hasn't gotten to it or does not want ot.

I don't know what this is. You're very angry, you scream a lot, you do a lot of ad hominem attacks and ask for a lot of support to my statements and then tell me to read a NYTimes article instead.

Nothing of what I wrote is speculative or misleading.

CDC equated delta's transmissibility to that of varicella.
I expressed concern about a 20mn unmasked indoor lunch break,
you demanded a study,
I gave an example of a sound study in a respected relevant journal, on indoor transmission of varicella.
You announced that you reported my posts multiple times as wildly speculative/verging on deliberately misleading.
You may not realize how messed up it would be to delete this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The amount of crazy sh*t being posted on this thread is wild. Somebody REALLY wants to scare DCPS parents. Gross.

It's that flu bro mom that kept taunting me and taunting me "you don't even have science to support it! Give me the links, lady! You can't even have an informed conversation!" I promise I didn't even *want* to go dig out a 1982 Pediatrics study. It is crazy relevant, and I'm more scared than I was before I found it.

Let me get this straight. A 40-year old article you googled, that is a retrospective study of 8 cases, in a completely different setting than schools, with no information about time of exposures, ABOUT A TOTALLY DIFFERENT VIRUS ... is "crazy relevant" to 20-minute school lunches? More relevant than the CDC? More than the NYTimes?

How about you just read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/29/well/family/back-to-school-covid.html

1. I didn't google it, I searched PubMed, because you were taunting me to start a science fight.
2. you continue to use all caps for the fact that it's a different virus, but the CDC (citation linked above) has stated delta is as contagious as chicken pox, so a study of a chicken pox outbreak is relevant.
3. You're wildly unreasonable (uninformed? Intellectually dishonest? Who knows) to reject a a '40 year old' study published in Pediatrics. Air microbiology and the laws of physics haven't changed.
4. Um, yeah, more relevant that the NYTimes, which I love and respect.

You think this is a "science fight"? Ok. I have tried to get Jeff to delete your post as wildly speculative/verging on deliberately misleading, but looks like he hasn't gotten to it or does not want ot.