Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a joke. This information is useless.

There are 130,000 children in DC. Tell me how many are getting in-person instruction currently and how many “outbreaks” are associated with that? And tell me what exactly these outbreaks were like. Was anyone actually sick? The vast majority of children have mild or no symptoms.

If you can’t answer the questions, then shut up.

Yeah, knowing the denominator would be pretty useful here. Whether anyone was "actually sick" is not as relevant, IMO, because the concern is partially about who kids will pass it to.

Agree, and we'd also like to know where they got infected. Was it outside of school, inside school but outside the classroom during contact with adults, or was it inside the classroom?

With the level of community spread we have, that's pretty much impossible to nail down.

I think they could start with looking at if 2 kids in the same class were ill at the same time. To me, "outbreak" would indicate transmission at school. As in, the virus broke out and spread. If a child attended school and was ill and did NOT transmit it to other students or teachers, I would not call that an outbreak but would call it a success showing that the measures taken in school are working. Very different interpretations depending on the definition.

This. The data isn't showing that there are actual outbreaks, just individual cases of 2 or more people affiliated with being at the school that they're incorrectly calling "outbreaks." And there are only 19 for all schools in DC combined. It's not saying that one kid was sick and got the whole class and teacher sick and several people died. It's very misleading to call it an outbreak.

+1. The chart labels these settings as "outbreak sources". But a school building cannot be the source of an outbreak if no one passed the infection to at least one other person they came into contact with there. The fact that two individuals at the same school building tested positive means absolutely nothing. They could have - and more than likely - caught the virus from someone in their family. It certainly does not indicate the school building was the source of the outbreak.

DCPS's recent case positivity data hints at this -- it shows onesies and twosies, with only one confirmed positive case of a DCPS student and around 10 staff positives (including staff members who do not work in school buildings).

At best this data is disingenuous. At worst, fearmongering. Shame on DC DOH et al for releasing such garbage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

And yet you go the grocery where people go to work every day.

You order take out, which someone has to cook and someone else has to bring to your step.

You get daily packages from amazon. Those things you bought were made by other people going to work, and then a bunch of other people got that thing delivered across the country to your front step.

You can take your kids to the doctor.

And to daycare.

If you get sick, you can go to the hospital and lots of people will take care of you — even if you have coronavirus.

If someone breaks into your house, the police show up.

You’re perfectly happy to benefit from other people going to work everyday. Maybe you could do your part? And help those people’s children have the same chance at a good life that you had?

+1

There is an outbreak in the regan building. Not sure how the data is reported in DC. But there is an open daycare there and those kids are now exposed by the hvac system there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

You think saving a life should always supersede all other considerations, even at the policy level? How could society function? How do you manage to live? I hope you don't drive, because every time you get in the car, you endanger others.

We really do need to address road deaths and injuries. We take for granted convenient/easy car access without dealing with the deaths and injuries that we're buying into with this.

There really are better ways to do it. The USA way is pretty awful.

I agree, but my point was merely that even the simple action of getting into a car endangers not only yourself but other people whom you might accidentally hit. That risk would be mitigated by lower speed limits, but it cannot be eliminated. The moral high horse of "we must avoid risking a single life" is not compatible with life.

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

I'm at about a 3x risk of dying from covid because of a chronic autoimmune disease, and when I make a cost-benefit analysis about whether my own kids should go back to school, I think they should, because my overall risk is still pretty low, even if it's three times yours, and because remote school really isn't keeping them as engaged as in-person school would. If I can make that kind of analysis about my own prospects of dying alone in a room, I think we can also make them in the aggregate about the overall benefits to society of opening schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

You think saving a life should always supersede all other considerations, even at the policy level? How could society function? How do you manage to live? I hope you don't drive, because every time you get in the car, you endanger others.

We really do need to address road deaths and injuries. We take for granted convenient/easy car access without dealing with the deaths and injuries that we're buying into with this.

There really are better ways to do it. The USA way is pretty awful.

This is off topic but people who ride bicycles with children down busy roads in DC are insane. Completely irresponsible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

You think saving a life should always supersede all other considerations, even at the policy level? How could society function? How do you manage to live? I hope you don't drive, because every time you get in the car, you endanger others.

We really do need to address road deaths and injuries. We take for granted convenient/easy car access without dealing with the deaths and injuries that we're buying into with this.

There really are better ways to do it. The USA way is pretty awful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

And yet you go the grocery where people go to work every day.

You order take out, which someone has to cook and someone else has to bring to your step.

You get daily packages from amazon. Those things you bought were made by other people going to work, and then a bunch of other people got that thing delivered across the country to your front step.

You can take your kids to the doctor.

And to daycare.

If you get sick, you can go to the hospital and lots of people will take care of you — even if you have coronavirus.

If someone breaks into your house, the police show up.

You’re perfectly happy to benefit from other people going to work everyday. Maybe you could do your part? And help those people’s children have the same chance at a good life that you had?

It's amazing how many people apparently don't understand that pretty much everything in life involves a cost or risk-benefit analysis, often involving the risk of death.

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

And yet you go the grocery where people go to work every day.

You order take out, which someone has to cook and someone else has to bring to your step.

You get daily packages from amazon. Those things you bought were made by other people going to work, and then a bunch of other people got that thing delivered across the country to your front step.

You can take your kids to the doctor.

And to daycare.

If you get sick, you can go to the hospital and lots of people will take care of you — even if you have coronavirus.

If someone breaks into your house, the police show up.

You’re perfectly happy to benefit from other people going to work everyday. Maybe you could do your part? And help those people’s children have the same chance at a good life that you had?

Anonymous wrote:This is a joke. This information is useless.

There are 130,000 children in DC. Tell me how many are getting in-person instruction currently and how many “outbreaks” are associated with that? And tell me what exactly these outbreaks were like. Was anyone actually sick? The vast majority of children have mild or no symptoms.

If you can’t answer the questions, then shut up.

This.

We need a denominator. Otherwise this means nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

Kids are more at risk during flu season -- were you agitating to close schools every flu season? Come on.

300,000 people didn’t die from the flu

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

Kids are more at risk during flu season -- were you agitating to close schools every flu season? Come on.

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

From a public health perspective, you have to consider costs and benefits to the population as a whole. Some other countries have decided that the benefits of in-person schooling outweigh the risks.

We moved from DCPS a while back and are currently in a private that has been open since Oct. They're taking appropriate precautions (see: swiss cheese model of pandemic defense). So far, no cases. They've added extra weeks of DL following Thanksgiving and winter break as an additional precautionary measure. I'm sure there will be cases at some point, but they are following local health officials' guidance for suspected cases, sending those exposed classes home if there is a possible case while allowing non-exposed groups to remain in-person--so far, so good.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/coronavirus-swiss-cheese-infection-mackay.html

Anonymous wrote:Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room

You think saving a life should always supersede all other considerations, even at the policy level? How could society function? How do you manage to live? I hope you don't drive, because every time you get in the car, you endanger others.

Ugh at people making cost benefit analysis about people dying alone in a room