Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO here. The transmissibility necessarily changes the math.

No literally math doesn’t change. Perhaps the parameters change. The parameters here are the test efficiency (no one is saying that changed with delta) and the rates at schools. The article notes a community rate of double what dc is currently seeing to say that 90% of cases would be false positives. School spread is generally lower than community and maxes at community rates. So unless the community rates are double what they presently are in DC, you still get 90% false positives. Even above double what they are, math still stay majority false positives.

Where is 90% false positive info from? Does that mean this has been the case all along? We shut down society for 90% false positives?

Please read that ASM article quoted in the testing thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO here. The transmissibility necessarily changes the math.

No literally math doesn’t change. Perhaps the parameters change. The parameters here are the test efficiency (no one is saying that changed with delta) and the rates at schools. The article notes a community rate of double what dc is currently seeing to say that 90% of cases would be false positives. School spread is generally lower than community and maxes at community rates. So unless the community rates are double what they presently are in DC, you still get 90% false positives. Even above double what they are, math still stay majority false positives.

Where is 90% false positive info from? Does that mean this has been the case all along? We shut down society for 90% false positives?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO here. The transmissibility necessarily changes the math.

No literally math doesn’t change. Perhaps the parameters change. The parameters here are the test efficiency (no one is saying that changed with delta) and the rates at schools. The article notes a community rate of double what dc is currently seeing to say that 90% of cases would be false positives. School spread is generally lower than community and maxes at community rates. So unless the community rates are double what they presently are in DC, you still get 90% false positives. Even above double what they are, math still stay majority false positives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, I just hope nobody tests.

+100. Several family at our schools (over 100 kids so far) coordinated not to opt into asymptomatic testing because of these rules

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO here. The transmissibility necessarily changes the math.

No literally math doesn’t change. Perhaps the parameters change. The parameters here are the test efficiency (no one is saying that changed with delta) and the rates at schools. The article notes a community rate of double what dc is currently seeing to say that 90% of cases would be false positives. School spread is generally lower than community and maxes at community rates. So unless the community rates are double what they presently are in DC, you still get 90% false positives. Even above double what they are, math still stay majority false positives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, I just hope nobody tests.

Of course you do. God forbid you’re stuck with your own
children because they have Covid.

I’m fine to be “stuck with my kids” if they have Covid. I’m not fine if they have to miss school for two weeks because a classmate had Covid. I’m also not fine if their completely asymptomatic sibling has to stay home for another two weeks after the first kid’s quarantine ends instead of being able to test daily and go back.

And your continued attempts to make this about parents wanting to get rid of their kids are pathetic and clueless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so confused- why are you opting out of testing? You don’t want to know when your child has COVID?

Of course not. Then they might be inconvenienced.

Anonymous wrote:NO here. The transmissibility necessarily changes the math.

Anonymous wrote:It will be fine. kids need to be back in school. period.

Anonymous wrote:I am so confused- why are you opting out of testing? You don’t want to know when your child has COVID?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so confused- why are you opting out of testing? You don’t want to know when your child has COVID?

In short:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/04/19/schools-covid-testing-cost/

You're quoting an outlook editorial from April 19. The risks, and resulting risk-benefit analyses were different then.

This is what WaPo outlook editorials sound like today, August 8, 2021.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/08/04/pediatrician-covid-children-delta/

in her title and subtitle, she wrote:
I treat pediatric covid patients. What I’m seeing in our hospital scares me.
Children can and do get very ill from the virus. The delta variant, the unvaccinated and a summer surge in a childhood respiratory disease are worrying.

in her concluding sentence, she wrote:
Masking (including universal masking in schools), physical distancing, testing, contact tracing, quarantining and vaccinating do help. If we abandon these crucial tools now, we are putting our children in harm’s way.

Math hasn't changed.

Covid has, though.

Only in terms of transmissibility. The risk to kids if they get infected remains extremely low, no matter what some doctors say they are seeing anecdotally. More kids get infected means the absolute numbers will rise. Also consider that many of these kids may have RSV or another virus in addition to testing positive for Covid. Hospitals won’t necessarily test for these other viruses (in my experience not even when the Covid test is negative and there is severe disease), but they test everyone for Covid.

What exactly is your clinical experience? If a child is sick in the hospital they are most likely tested for at least 20 of the most common of respiratory viruses, which includes RSV.