I think it's wild that close contacts of a known Covid case weren't quarantined whether or not they tested positive themselves.
First, I have to point out that they shouldn't have used that as their lead photo. Class size here ranges from 20-35 depending on age/grade. Some of our old neighborhood schools have 300 kids jammed in tiny old buildings, while some of the schools out in the sprawl have 600 kids jammed in. Every teacher will want to hold their class outside in the open air so it won't be a peaceful outdoor setting for five.Being open 5 days a week for every student is probably not going to be doable, but there are ways to be safe-ish while opening schools. The trickier part in places where there is a lot of community spread is keeping them open. View: https://twitter.com/carlzimmer/status/1280873227502456832
Hong Kong reopened their schools in May after a four month break - They used a combination of face to face school every second day or splitting the day into morning and afternoon classes - This week they got their first cases in two schools.Being open 5 days a week for every student is probably not going to be doable, but there are ways to be safe-ish while opening schools. The trickier part in places where there is a lot of community spread is keeping them open. View: https://twitter.com/carlzimmer/status/1280873227502456832
Nonsense. There's more to "safety" than only considering COVID 19.We have already heard that safety isn't the number one priority of dt and bd for school opening in the USA.
Our grandsons are in that elementary to early middle school range and the challenges for healthy behavior are huge. They are good at home but in a school environment that will be tough. The current stress on the family is mitigated well but emotionally the kids could do with more contact and development that comes from exposure to peers. That said; this has to be managed better than business reopennings in the US. Florida, Texas having to shut stuff down again during the first wave of C-19 is more costly than what occurred before. They're facing ICU shortages already and the 4th of July holiday wave hasn't hit...it's a giant sh*t sandwich because of personal behavior.Nonsense. There's more to "safety" than only considering COVID 19.
For many parents, the most pressing question as the nation emerges from pandemic lockdown is when they can send their children to school, camp or child care.
We asked more than 500 epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists when they expect to restart 20 activities of daily life, assuming that the coronavirus pandemic and the public health response to it unfold as they expect. On sending children to school, camp or child care, 70 percent said they would do so either right now, later this summer or in the fall — much sooner than most said they would resume other activities that involved big groups of people gathering indoors. Others, though, said they would wait for a vaccine, which could take a year or more.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/upshot/epidemiologists-decisions-children-school-coronavirus.html
With the above principles in mind, the AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school. The importance of in-person learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020. Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation. This, in turn, places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality. Beyond the educational impact and social impact of school closures, there has been substantial impact on food security and physical activity for children and families.
https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning-considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/
Our grandsons are in that elementary to early middle school range and the challenges for healthy behavior are huge. They are good at home but in a school environment that will be tough. The current stress on the family is mitigated well but emotionally the kids could do with more contact and development that comes from exposure to peers. That said; this has to be managed better than business reopennings in the US. Florida, Texas having to shut stuff down again during the first wave of C-19 is more costly than what occurred before. They're facing ICU shortages already and the 4th of July holiday wave hasn't hit...it's a giant sh*t sandwich because of personal behavior.
You think kids will be better or worse off?
This is a tough one. Kids need peer interaction, but at the same time schools can be a breeding ground for diseases. I'm glad I don't have to worry about these kinds of decisions.Our grandsons are in that elementary to early middle school range and the challenges for healthy behavior are huge. They are good at home but in a school environment that will be tough. The current stress on the family is mitigated well but emotionally the kids could do with more contact and development that comes from exposure to peers. That said; this has to be managed better than business reopennings in the US. Florida, Texas having to shut stuff down again during the first wave of C-19 is more costly than what occurred before. They're facing ICU shortages already and the 4th of July holiday wave hasn't hit...it's a giant sh*t sandwich because of personal behavior.
You think kids will be better or worse off?
Your conclusion is an over simplification of the varied situations that exist. Merckx Index noted that Ivy League schools have cancelled all Div I sports. ALL. That economic impact is real, too but not as compelling as the health consequences. No one here is saying C19 controls every decision but US citizens' behavior when encouraged to reassume a cautious approach to business has seen many behave in ignorant and self-serving ways. The religious and political extremists here are still in denial until they catch the bug. My grandsons live in an area with very vocal, religious anti-vaxxers that feel they have protection from a higher source. They look like normal people and so will their kids.It's hard to say.
My point is societies across the globe can not only be concerned with COVID. In the US we saw crazy stuff happen because of bad info right off the bat. Only COVID related hospitalizations causing all sorts of necessary procedures to be postponed including on-going cancer treatments.
If we want to ignore the dangers of kids being ordered out of the classroom then we do so at our own peril. In other words, if COVID considerations override every decision we make then those decisions are very likely to nothing short of catastrophic.
I replied to a comment stating that kids needing to get back to school was somehow disregarding their safety, which was nonsense. An argument can and is being made by many suggesting the keeping kids out of class may be negatively effecting their safety too.Your conclusion is an over simplification of the varied situations that exist.
Watching the mixed messaging on reopening protocols from the US WH suggests that the pressure to open and threats of financial retaliation for those school systems that don't open is making it's own point. That, to me shows a condition less than uninterested and dangerously so.I replied to a comment stating that kids needing to get back to school was somehow disregarding their safety, which was nonsense. An argument can and is being made by many suggesting the keeping kids out of class may be negatively effecting their safety too.
There are lots of moving parts in this situation and all I'm saying is it's unfair to suggest those insisting on the need for kids to go back to school are somehow uninterested in their safety as a top priority.
I have read several, maybe as many as 10 of the various articles from non-school child professionals as well as about the same number from school professionals.It's hard to say.
My point is societies across the globe can not only be concerned with COVID. In the US we saw crazy stuff happen because of bad info right off the bat. Only COVID related hospitalizations causing all sorts of necessary procedures to be postponed including on-going cancer treatments.
If we want to ignore the dangers of kids being ordered out of the classroom then we do so at our own peril. In other words, if COVID considerations override every decision we make then those decisions are very likely to nothing short of catastrophic.
This was my point last night: the CDC developed guidelines for safe reopening this fall and dt/bd said that they were too tough. That is saying that safety isn't the number one priority.Watching the mixed messaging on reopening protocols from the US WH suggests that the pressure to open and threats of financial retaliation for those school systems that don't open is making it's own point. That, to me shows a condition less than uninterested and dangerously so.
Watching the mixed messaging on reopening protocols from the US WH suggests that the pressure to open and threats of financial retaliation for those school systems that don't open is making it's own point. That, to me shows a condition less than uninterested and dangerously so.
So you completely ignore the risk in keeping kids home. Okay.I'll take a year behind over dead any day.
I'm speaking to bad decisions in our recent past and using this as an example.talking about people choosing not to have elective procedures has nothing to do with opening schools
That's not 100% true... but you prove my point.The hospitals weren't stopping the procedures, the people were opting out. It is an terrifying conundrum for people though.
Yes. Thank you.There are by now plenty of examples from around Europe that show that you can reopen schools without meaningful negative impacts on infection rates.
To your point and Jagartrott's comments; there are plenty of examples in Europe. Our problem is New York City has a very dense population and school facilities along with 1.1mil of students. That is a much different circumstance than the greater part of the country, for sure. That the individual States and school districts are being driven by a National policy is ignoring that fact to get more work force in play. I hate to sound totally cynical but we've passed this way before when commerce and politics forced meat packing plants to stay open. How did that turn out? Really fu*cking bad for workers.Well of course. One can't merely disagree, the rhetoric must include language that renders any opposition as evil. Apparently ignoring downside risk regarding kids ordered out of school is a virtue.
The only other thing I am left wondering is when can kids safely go back to school in your opinion? What are the metrics?
The teachers are the ones more worried about schools staying opened. There have been sporadic infections in Australian schools usually only one or two kids or one teacher, and one much larger outbreak in a school which was immediately closed for extra cleaning while self isolation and testing went on. Don't think there have been any Australian fatalities re schools so far. Australia has been using temporary closures, extra cleaning and online learning re schools but initially all schools were closed except for parents who had to work and could not make alternative arrangements for their children.There are by now plenty of examples from around Europe that show that you can reopen schools without meaningful negative impacts on infection rates. What drives up infections much, much more is leisure (pubs, cinemas, restaurants, hotels, fitness clubs, choirs, etc.), so if you allow that, you should definitely allow reopening schools. It's in fact amazing to me that indoor leisure activities were actually allowed back before reopening schools in some regions.
In Belgium, face masks will be compulsory from Saturday on in shops, cinemas and basically all indoor environments with plenty of people. Reasons are: (a) infection numbers aren't dropping anymore, (b) we see resurgence in some places in Europe, (c) it's getting clearer and clearer that indoor venues are very risky for superspreader events, (d) making the face masks mandatory will remind people that we're not out of this mess yet.
Good.
I agree that opening bars, theaters, gyms, etc was not wise. At this point in the USA though, schools would be out for summer so it wasn't a "should we open bars or schools" decision.There are by now plenty of examples from around Europe that show that you can reopen schools without meaningful negative impacts on infection rates. What drives up infections much, much more is leisure (pubs, cinemas, restaurants, hotels, fitness clubs, choirs, etc.), so if you allow that, you should definitely allow reopening schools. It's in fact amazing to me that indoor leisure activities were actually allowed back before reopening schools in some regions.
In Belgium, face masks will be compulsory from Saturday on in shops, cinemas and basically all indoor environments with plenty of people. Reasons are: (a) infection numbers aren't dropping anymore, (b) we see resurgence in some places in Europe, (c) it's getting clearer and clearer that indoor venues are very risky for superspreader events, (d) making the face masks mandatory will remind people that we're not out of this mess yet.
Good.
Trickery. You almost had me.To your point and Jagartrott's comments; there are plenty of examples in Europe. Our problem is New York City has a very dense population and school facilities along with 1.1mil of students. That is a much different circumstance than the greater part of the country, for sure. That the individual States and school districts are being driven by a National policy is ignoring that fact to get more work force in play. I hate to sound totally cynical but we've passed this way before when commerce and politics forced meat packing plants to stay open. How did that turn out? Really fu*cking bad for workers.
Some areas could probably open shifted classes in lower density populations to lower risk. Local jurisdictions should have that right and responsibility to immediately respond to positive tests. What to do with NYC, LA, Miami....? Shutting down huge school populations for a few positive tests is worse than being closed. That will be the challenge as most of our hot outbreaks are urban environments.
We also have the tandem planning of parental re-entry to jobs that have been shuttered. As Jagartrott also mentioned:
(c) it's getting clearer and clearer that indoor venues are very risky for superspreader events, (d) making the face masks mandatory will remind people that we're not out of this mess yet.
Those are the very parental workers sitting on the sidelines with no unemployment benefits and can't work from home. Now they are in the highest risk work situation and going home to their kids who are now forced to go to school.
Unless major hot areas like Miami, Houston, wherever are stabilized and showing decline in positive tests (with a requisite amount of testing with full disclosure as opposed to the bs WH explanation) ; then the schools and risk businesses are still the overriding condition for success. Not simple and the answers and new questions will continue to come. We need a political consensus that agrees and it's doubtful that condition couldn't exist until after November's elections.