Reopen Schools?

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,870
Reaction score
2,502
Points
113
That Redfield number is backward looking and is certainly based on a complete dearth of testing for the first couple of months. He has never suggested that tests are currently catching only 10% of tests, especially since he said that a month and a half ago

(KGF completely misunderstood the earlier point and I'm hoping this post makes that clear as well)
What earlier point? That as cases rise, deaths rise; and as cases fall, deaths fall? That would be a brilliant deduction. B/c my point was that they don’t rise at the same rate b/c there are mitigating tactics and circumstances, which you seemed to challenge by showing the slopes of the line looking similar using two different scales. I don’t think I “misunderstood” anything.

And Redfield‘s assessment seems quite unambiguous from this late June WaPo article:

The number of people in the United States who have been infected with the coronavirus is likely to be 10 times as high as the 2.4 million confirmed cases, based on antibody tests, the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Thursday.

CDC Director Robert Redfield’s estimate, shared with reporters in a conference call, indicates that at least 24 million Americans have been infected so far...


I believe the suggestion was that this was due to asymptomatic CV not being detected. Has that situation changed significantly?
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
13,376
Reaction score
4,018
Points
113
What earlier point? That as cases rise, deaths rise; and as cases fall, deaths fall? That would be a brilliant deduction. B/c my point was that they don’t rise at the same rate b/c there are mitigating tactics and circumstances, which you seemed to challenge by showing the slopes of the line looking similar using two different scales. I don’t think I “misunderstood” anything.

And Redfield‘s assessment seems quite unambiguous from this late June WaPo article:

The number of people in the United States who have been infected with the coronavirus is likely to be 10 times as high as the 2.4 million confirmed cases, based on antibody tests, the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Thursday.

CDC Director Robert Redfield’s estimate, shared with reporters in a conference call, indicates that at least 24 million Americans have been infected so far...


I believe the suggestion was that this was due to asymptomatic CV not being detected. Has that situation changed significantly?
A) Your earlier point about testing capacity vs testing reality. I was saying that IF (IF, IF, IF) we're currently catching only 1/10th as many cases as there really are there's a massive failure of testing.

which leads to...

B) Your quote makes my point for me. First, it's from June. Secondly, it mentions the 2.4M cases that are a cumulative number. Even in June he wasn't saying that we were only catching 1/10th of the CURRENT number of cases. It was backward looking over the course of the pandemic. Test positivity didn't drop below 10% for the first 3 months of the pandemic, so clearly things have changed since then.

Which all leads back to my original point about the Georgia school, which is that saying that 345k positive tests last week means 3.45M actual cases is a totally made up number.

(Oh, and also it makes no sense to then assume we caught every case in the school)
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,870
Reaction score
2,502
Points
113
A) Your earlier point about testing capacity vs testing reality. I was saying that IF (IF, IF, IF) we're currently catching only 1/10th as many cases as there really are there's a massive failure of testing.

which leads to...

B) Your quote makes my point for me. First, it's from June. Secondly, it mentions the 2.4M cases that are a cumulative number. Even in June he wasn't saying that we were only catching 1/10th of the CURRENT number of cases. It was backward looking over the course of the pandemic. Test positivity didn't drop below 10% for the first 3 months of the pandemic, so clearly things have changed since then.

Which all leads back to my original point about the Georgia school, which is that saying that 345k positive tests last week means 3.45M actual cases is a totally made up number.

(Oh, and also it makes no sense to then assume we caught every case in the school)
Frankly, it doesn’t seem like there is enough evidence to support any precise opinion with certainty. Beyond antibody testing, I would like to know just how many test positive asymptotic results that there are and that would give us a better idea of just how many asymptotic people that there are in the population. I would think Redfield would or should have a handle on that, but I’ve never seen anyone publish that number.
 
Last edited:

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
51,349
Reaction score
8,755
Points
113
Regarding the last tweet of 9 testing positive at the high school, what would be the expected number of positive tests in a school with 2,000+ kids plus staff? Is 9 unexpected?
I'm not Deena Grayson. But I think the issue is lack of transparency.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
51,349
Reaction score
8,755
Points
113
Boy, she must really feel sorry for those grocery store clerks that we see working and coming in contact with hundreds of people a day within a few feet of them. Of course, I’m sure she thinks that store clerks are far more essential workers than her. howie 🙄
Your utter disdain for any teacher that doesn't conduct themselves in alignment with your political views is apparent.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,537
Reaction score
2,130
Points
113
A grocery story clerk might be in face-to-face contact with a customer for a few minutes in a fairly open space while they ring up your order - unless you're buying $500 worth of groceries.

A teacher with in-class students will be in face-to-face contact with a group of students for 7 hours, give or take, in a relatively closed space.

with all due respect, probably not the best comparison.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
51,349
Reaction score
8,755
Points
113
A grocery story clerk might be in face-to-face contact with a customer for a few minutes in a fairly open space while they ring up your order - unless you're buying $500 worth of groceries.

A teacher with in-class students will be in face-to-face contact with a group of students for 7 hours, give or take, in a relatively closed space.

with all due respect, probably not the best comparison.
Exactly.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,870
Reaction score
2,502
Points
113
A grocery story clerk might be in face-to-face contact with a customer for a few minutes in a fairly open space while they ring up your order - unless you're buying $500 worth of groceries.

A teacher with in-class students will be in face-to-face contact with a group of students for 7 hours, give or take, in a relatively closed space.

with all due respect, probably not the best comparison.
Not exactly. Under CV19 social distancing guidelines, there is no reason to come within 10 feet of a teacher that can be wearing a face shield or mask or any PPE that they wish with hand sanitizer in every classroom.

You’re working on a very limited assumptions that no accommodations can be made for the teacher in the room with students. Are essential businesses the only ones capable of making protective accommodations for others?

For that matter, there are some school districts that are employing creative solutions to reducing student crowding. But some just aren’t trying b/c they are being run by teachers unions rather than school administration.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,870
Reaction score
2,502
Points
113
Your utter disdain for any teacher that doesn't conduct themselves in alignment with your political views is apparent.
My retired wife is working as a graduate school lecturer in a room of about 27 grad school students. She does it b/c she wants to contribute to the next generation of her professional discipline. She isn’t hesitant to enter the classroom with a required face shield and appropriate social distancing required by the university.

Why are elementary and secondary teachers different when it is their actual career that they are supposedly dedicated to?
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
10,086
Reaction score
1,678
Points
113
A grocery story clerk might be in face-to-face contact with a customer for a few minutes in a fairly open space while they ring up your order - unless you're buying $500 worth of groceries.

A teacher with in-class students will be in face-to-face contact with a group of students for 7 hours, give or take, in a relatively closed space.

with all due respect, probably not the best comparison.
Holy shit, that would be the world's smallest ever classroom and apparently with no lunch or recess breaks or other breaks. That is some serious hardcore learning environment.

School must have changed a lot in the last few years. Can't say I've ever known a teacher to get within a few feet of students at the front of the room and/or at the board unless the student leaves their desk and approaches the teacher with a question?

Call me cynical but I think teachers absolutely could teach class without coming into close contact with students?
 

RahSkiUMah

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
349
Reaction score
353
Points
63
"Children are unlikely to be the main drivers of the COVID‐19 pandemic – a systematic review"
There are some very interesting things to note about covid in children from this review:
  • Children have been largely "healthy" meaning if they do get covid there is a good chance they will be asymptomatic. There is evidence that asymptomatic children = lower viral load. This is important because lower viral load means you're less likely to inoculate another person, and if you do the thought is they're less likely to have worse disease. This is the same idea behind masking for self benefit, blocking some viral particles will mean a lower viral titer at initial infection, leading to less severe disease.
  • Children are unlikely to be the "index case" where a family infection cluster happens - the evidence I think is a little limited here but essentially there isn't strong evidence that if a child is infected the rest of the family will be. However, if an adult is infected in a family, they are much more likely to spread.
    • This could be related to the above bullet point as well, families may be getting infected by asymptomatic children, who due to low viral loads only induce asymptomatic disease in adults and thus we don't have a lot of these scenarios detected.
  • There are some interesting anecdotes sprinkled throughout, like:
    • The Australian National Centre for Immunization Research in New South Wales described nine high-school students and nine staff with confirmed COVID-19. These 18 individuals had contact with 735 students and 128 staff and only two children may have contracted COVID-19 from these initial school cases, but no staff contracted COVID-19 from these 18 individuals.
The rationale for school closures is often to limit community spread, there is not strong evidence at this time that children contribute strongly to community spread of symptomatic disease. We do have to be careful at applying other nations community findings to our own, as we are clearly one of the least healthy and compliant countries out there and that has absolutely contributed to our worse outcomes/spread throughout this pandemic

At the end of the day, we need to be careful and be prepared to pull the plug if it becomes evident that (1) Teachers are at high risk of adverse outcomes (2) Outbreaks traced to schools are evident (we should try to evaluate symptomatic vs asymptomatic ratios if possible) (3) Children are at higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Updated to add full text at top
 
Last edited:

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
13,376
Reaction score
4,018
Points
113
"Children are unlikely to be the main drivers of the COVID‐19 pandemic – a systematic review"
There are some very interesting things to note about covid in children from this review:
  • Children have been largely "healthy" meaning if they do get covid there is a good chance they will be asymptomatic. There is evidence that asymptomatic children = lower viral load. This is important because lower viral load means you're less likely to inoculate another person, and if you do the thought it they're less likely to have worse disease. This is the same idea behind masking for self benefit, blocking some viral particles will mean a lower viral titer at initial infection, leading to less severe disease.
  • Children are unlikely to be the "index case" where a family infection cluster happens - the evidence I think is a little limited here but essentially there isn't strong evidence that if a child is infected the rest of the family will be. However, if and adult is infected in a family, they are much more likely to spread.
    • This could be related to the above bullet point as well, families may be getting infected by asymptomatic children, who due to low viral loads only induce asymptomatic disease in adults and thus we don't have a lot of these scenarios detected.
  • There are some interesting anecdotes sprinkled throughout, like:
    • The Australian National Centre for Immunization Research in New South Wales described nine high-school students and nine staff with confirmed COVID-19. These 18 individuals had contact with 735 students and 128 staff and only two children may have contracted COVID-19 from these initial school cases, but no staff contracted COVID-19 from these 18 individuals.
The rationale for school closures is often to limit community spread, there is not strong evidence at this time that children contribute strongly to community spread of symptomatic disease. We do have to be careful at applying other nations community findings to our own, as we are clearly one of the least healthy and compliant countries out there and that has absolutely contributed to our worse outcomes/spread throughout this pandemic

At the end of the day, we need to be careful and be prepared to pull the plug if it becomes evident that (1) Teachers are at high risk of adverse outcomes (2) Outbreaks traced to schools are evident (we should try to evaluate symptomatic vs asymptomatic ratios if possible) (3) Children are at higher risk of adverse outcomes.
Some issues:

a) Because children are often asymptomatic, they probably are getting tested less frequently, meaning we know less about how their getting and spreading the virus.

b) Schools actually were closed

c) The literature search is from early May. A lot has changed since then, including quite a few outbreaks at schools
 

RahSkiUMah

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
349
Reaction score
353
Points
63
There's no full text here, so it's hard to say what detail there is. But two big issues:

a) Because children are often asymptomatic, they probably are getting tested less frequently, meaning we know less about how their getting and spreading the virus.

b) Schools have been closed for the summer and for the virus.
Added the full text link as well thank you. On both points, absolutely true, a lot of this is based on the circumstances surrounding index cases, other countries, and children in general being relatively healthy. Like I said at the end, anything we do from an opening standpoint we should be careful. I think we will see soon enough in some of the southern states whether this data holds true in the U.S.

Edit: And to c) - a valid criticism, I will keep my eyes out for more recent studies and follow-up.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
51,349
Reaction score
8,755
Points
113
My retired wife is working as a graduate school lecturer in a room of about 27 grad school students. She does it b/c she wants to contribute to the next generation of her professional discipline. She isn’t hesitant to enter the classroom with a required face shield and appropriate social distancing required by the university.

Why are elementary and secondary teachers different when it is their actual career that they are supposedly dedicated to?
I would hope it's a lot easier to get 27 grad students to comply with wearing masks, good hygene and social distancing than say 40 1st graders. Don't you think?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
46,935
Reaction score
2,711
Points
113
I would hope it's a lot easier to get 27 grad students to comply with wearing masks, good hygene and social distancing than say 40 1st graders. Don't you think?
fine with me. Shut down the schools. Good parents will figure out on their own how to educate their kids, and hopefully many will realize the benefits of taking them out of the state indoctrination facilities. We might even one day pass Rand Paul's bill to transfer all federal primary education money directly to parents. WHOOPS
 

Winnipegopher

Wag more, bark less
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
3,554
Reaction score
54
Points
48
At some point, risk management needs to come into the COVID discussion. If schools are closed or online, most middle class ,upper middle class and upper class kids will be fine. Their parents will home school or create private classes and the kids will learn well enough. Where school closure is a problem is for poor kids. Many have parents who have to work and are alone all day and a lot of them need a physical school as their gateway to more stability. In the poor parts of Winnipeg (among the poorest in Canada) schools offer all kinds of programs including heavily subsidized meals, computer access and most importantly, safety. In my mind, COVID safety measures must be taken to make schools as safe as possible but any decision needs to include a big picture and thoughtful analysis of risk.

Everyone involved should be scared but in my mind keeping schools closed is likely more dangerous than opening them.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
51,349
Reaction score
8,755
Points
113
At some point, risk management needs to come into the COVID discussion. If schools are closed or online, most middle class ,upper middle class and upper class kids will be fine. Their parents will home school or create private classes and the kids will learn well enough. Where school closure is a problem is for poor kids. Many have parents who have to work and are alone all day and a lot of them need a physical school as their gateway to more stability. In the poor parts of Winnipeg (among the poorest in Canada) schools offer all kinds of programs including heavily subsidized meals, computer access and most importantly, safety. In my mind, COVID safety measures must be taken to make schools as safe as possible but any decision needs to include a big picture and thoughtful analysis of risk.

Everyone involved should be scared but in my mind keeping schools closed is likely more dangerous than opening them.
I think it's pretty widely agreed they have to try to be open at some level/capacity. The problem is that there is nothing close to a coherent plan in place in many places. Or at least it seems that way so far.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,870
Reaction score
2,502
Points
113
I would hope it's a lot easier to get 27 grad students to comply with wearing masks, good hygene and social distancing than say 40 1st graders. Don't you think?
Forty 1st graders? What kind of school district has a class of forty 1st graders?

Yeah, you’re right. The school districts being bullied by the unions don’t want to use any creativity to figure out how conduct in-person class.

Of course, the reason is that union teachers, being assured of a job and their contract, aren’t compelled to do anything to open our schools; which is the reason why our public schools suck. They have a captive market that can’t easily complain or force change.

Look to the charter schools to get a big lift from the response to this situation.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,382
Reaction score
1,877
Points
113
Closing the schools has nothing to do with safety. That's evidenced by teachers unions saying they will teach if their political, non-education demands are met. End of discussion.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
51,349
Reaction score
8,755
Points
113
Forty 1st graders? What kind of school district has a class of forty 1st graders?

Yeah, you’re right. The school districts being bullied by the unions don’t want to use any creativity to figure out how conduct in-person class.

Of course, the reason is that union teachers, being assured of a job and their contract, aren’t compelled to do anything to open our schools; which is the reason why our public schools suck. They have a captive market that can’t easily complain or force change.

Look to the charter schools to get a big lift from the response to this situation.
Small schools that can only afford one section per grade for one.

I think a very high % of teachers want to come back and teach in person if it can be done safely. The logistics of actually doing so, especially with younger kids, is difficult. Your notion of the teacher staying 5 away from students at all times wearing a face shield is a bit laughable.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,870
Reaction score
2,502
Points
113
Small schools that can only afford one section per grade for one.

I think a very high % of teachers want to come back and teach in person if it can be done safely. The logistics of actually doing so, especially with younger kids, is difficult. Your notion of the teacher staying 5 away from students at all times wearing a face shield is a bit laughable.
Actually, I said 10 feet, but why would that be difficult? Can’t they hear from 10 foot? Is 10 foot more difficult the online? Yes, teaching 40 1st graders online would be much easier. howie 🙄
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,537
Reaction score
2,130
Points
113
In MN at least, you could not put 40 1st-graders in the same classroom - unless the room was big enough to allow for that many kids with social distancing. and if your district is in the "hybrid" category, classrooms may only operate at 50% of normal capacity.

at my local school district, they are creating additional sections for all the elementary grades and hiring extra teachers so that they can have students in class. most sections will have 13 to 15 kids in a classroom. So this district is going to spend up to $450,000 out of its reserve accounts to hire more teachers and paras so they can have kids back in class.

Interestingly, in a survey of district parents, just under 9% of parents said their children would not attend school in person and were requesting distance learning.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,076
Reaction score
1,102
Points
113
Rochester schools going distance learning only. Schools around rochester all going hybrid. Private schools offering traditional schooling.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,636
Reaction score
619
Points
113
In MN at least, you could not put 40 1st-graders in the same classroom - unless the room was big enough to allow for that many kids with social distancing. and if your district is in the "hybrid" category, classrooms may only operate at 50% of normal capacity.

at my local school district, they are creating additional sections for all the elementary grades and hiring extra teachers so that they can have students in class. most sections will have 13 to 15 kids in a classroom. So this district is going to spend up to $450,000 out of its reserve accounts to hire more teachers and paras so they can have kids back in class.

Interestingly, in a survey of district parents, just under 9% of parents said their children would not attend school in person and were requesting distance learning.
Our district (Centennial) did not release the results of their survey. I’m assuming a high percentage are declining full time remote and accepting the hybrid they are offering, based on my purely anecdotal conversations with other parents. Besides, if there was a large percentage of people declining in-person learning, they would have publicized it, as it would make their decision look like it was based on parent feedback. I have to imagine a large percentage want kids in schools, but they don’t want to publicize this as it makes the union look bad because they’re obviously the thing standing in the way of more in-person teaching.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,382
Reaction score
1,877
Points
113

OldBob53

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2019
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
228
Points
63
Kids belong in school, else they won't be properly socialized, i.e., brainwashed.

What could go wrong anyway?
 
Top Bottom