Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[theJ]

6 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Everything that has said children aren't effective carriers has been anecdotal. I'm sure the public policy will change once we have rock solid data that it would be safe.

And while normally I'd be fine with skepticism that the government would make the right decision, I'm confident that even politicians will realize the quickest way to get voted out of office is to lock parents in with their kids unnecessarily.

Which is kind of why i'm a little surprised they're declaring things like this now.  Why not wait until July?  The rest of this transpired so quickly, surely we don't have to make decisions now?

[ramssuperbowl99]

1 minute ago, theJ said:

Which is kind of why i'm a little surprised they're declaring things like this now.  Why not wait until July?  The rest of this transpired so quickly, surely we don't have to make decisions now?

Yeah the announcement now seems odd, but I guess they want to start with the worst case scenario and then move things up based on what we learn. In this case, the worst case scenario would be that children can still infect other people.

(Also, we'd need data broken out by age. Based on what we know now, I'd imagine the day elementary schools are ready to re-open will be earlier than the day a high school could re-open.)

[mission27]

7 minutes ago, theJ said:

I had heard yesterday that Ohio was considering a rotating classroom, starting in Sept.  Kids would go for 2 days, virtual 3.  They would alternate with the other half of the class, so the classrooms were only half full.

hmmm.  Could be worse I get.

[theJ]

12 minutes ago, mission27 said:

hmmm.  Could be worse I get.

The thing i was trying to figure out, is how they do that with teachers who have young kids.  In our particular situation, or kindergartner (would be 1st grade next year) would be in school for 2 days.  My wife would be in school 5 days.  Do they just assume that i can stay home to watch him?

[mission27]

7 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

(Also, we'd need data broken out by age. Based on what we know now, I'd imagine the day elementary schools are ready to re-open will be earlier than the day a high school could re-open.)

Some data by age...

There are 20 million people in New York state.  ~15% or 3 million of them have had coronavirus at this point, based on antibody testing. 

Roughly 22% of the population are minors, so about 660k cases if we assume a roughly equal distribution.  There have been 11 fatalities in this age group.  0.0017% of cases.

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities?%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no&%3Atabs=n

If the point is to protect children, the benefit of letting kids go back to school far outweigh the risk at any age.  The only valid reason to keep schools closed is to protect teachers and the families of students - which is a valid concern - but nobody under 20 has a meaningful risk of getting seriously ill from this.

[theJ]

12 minutes ago, mission27 said:

Some data by age...

There are 20 million people in New York state.  ~15% or 3 million of them have had coronavirus at this point, based on antibody testing. 

Roughly 22% of the population are minors, so about 660k cases if we assume a roughly equal distribution.  There have been 11 fatalities in this age group.  0.0017% of cases.

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities?%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no&%3Atabs=n

If the point is to protect children, the benefit of letting kids go back to school far outweigh the risk at any age.  The only valid reason to keep schools closed is to protect teachers and the families of students - which is a valid concern - but nobody under 20 has a meaningful risk of getting seriously ill from this.

Also, so far, 0 deaths in the age range of 0-19 in Ohio, and only 33 hospitalizations.  Seems those cases are very rare.

I agree about protecting teachers.  Though i think you can make it fairly safe for them by keeping them separated from the rest of the staff.

[MWil23]

51 minutes ago, mission27 said:

January 1?  I havent seen anything about classes being canceled for the fall, is that true?

Check out Maryland’s governors 3 tier plan

[ramssuperbowl99]

17 minutes ago, mission27 said:

Some data by age...

There are 20 million people in New York state.  ~15% or 3 million of them have had coronavirus at this point, based on antibody testing. 

Roughly 22% of the population are minors, so about 660k cases if we assume a roughly equal distribution.  There have been 11 fatalities in this age group.  0.0017% of cases.

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities?%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no&%3Atabs=n

If the point is to protect children, the benefit of letting kids go back to school far outweigh the risk at any age.  The only valid reason to keep schools closed is to protect teachers and the families of students - which is a valid concern - but nobody under 20 has a meaningful risk of getting seriously ill from this.

This is all based on an assumption, which public health policy can't rely on, and doesn't address whether children can infect other people. We would need hard data, especially on the latter point. Fortunately we have all summer to get it.

[mission27]

6 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

This is all based on an assumption, which public health policy can't rely on, and doesn't address whether children can infect other people. We would need hard data, especially on the latter point. Fortunately we have all summer to get it.

I honestly don't follow this

How are the number of fatalities not hard data?  Children aren't dying from this (in meaningful numbers) anywhere in the world. 

I completely understand the issue of spread from children to adults, which I agree we do not have clear data on, but this is clearly not killing children.

[Blahstoise]

Some UK death stats from Hospitals:

Under 60s without a pre-existing condition who have died: 238

Under 40s without: 31

All under 40s: 116

Under 20s without: 3

 

Total Deaths: 22000

We need to do a better job of protecting the vulnerable.

 

Edited May 7, 2020 by Blahstoise

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, mission27 said:

I honestly don't follow this

How are the number of fatalities not hard data?  Children aren't dying from this (in meaningful numbers) anywhere in the world. 

I completely understand the issue of spread from children to adults, which I agree we do not have clear data on, but this is clearly not killing children.

We'd still want the total number of cases to demonstrate safety. I agree though the fatality numbers make that a formality.

[mission27]

18 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Check out Maryland’s governors 3 tier plan

This is what I'm seeing, it seems sensible.  I would assume Stage 2 is a June thing if DC metro starts to move in the right direction in the next couple of weeks.  Stage 3 type activities have been a long way off all along.

EDIT: Obviously June is behind the timeline for anywhere else in the world pretty much, but DC metro and Minneapolis are the two major metros that don't seem to have peaked yet so its appropriate for these areas to go slower than most

In the first stage, local governments would have the flexibility to make decisions on reopening libraries, parks and other services, Hogan said.

Stage two would allow for larger social gatherings, indoor gym classes, regular childcare, increased mass transit schedules, indoor religious services, restaurant and bar service with restrictions, and elective procedures at hospitals.

Stage three would allow large social gatherings, the reopening of entertainment venues, large religious gatherings and fewer restrictions on visitors at nursing homes and hospitals. But Hogan cautioned that “there is no realistic timeline yet for achieving this level.”

 

Edited May 7, 2020 by mission27

[mission27]

2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

3 minutes ago, mission27 said:

I honestly don't follow this

How are the number of fatalities not hard data?  Children aren't dying from this (in meaningful numbers) anywhere in the world. 

I completely understand the issue of spread from children to adults, which I agree we do not have clear data on, but this is clearly not killing children.

We'd still want the total number of cases to demonstrate safety. I agree though the fatality numbers make that a formality.

Oh yeah, I agree.  The CFR is a very rough estimate for sure.  But at this point we're arguing over like 0.0017% and 0.0024% or whatever, its clearly very low, and the real issue is are children a major disease vector for fueling community spread that can effect the more at risk populations.

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, mission27 said:

Oh yeah, I agree.  The CFR is a very rough estimate for sure.  But at this point we're arguing over like 0.0017% and 0.0024% or whatever, its clearly very low, and the real issue is are children a major disease vector for fueling community spread that can effect the more at risk populations.

And the potential legal liability incurred by the school district if some teenager infects grandma.

[theJ]

4 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

And the potential legal liability incurred by the school district if some teenager infects grandma.

I wouldn't think that is much of a concern.  It would be very hard to prove how she caught it, and then again that the school did something wrong and not the teenager.  He could have caught it somewhere other than school, or not followed proper hygiene recommendations.  Just seems like too many variables, and too many things that have to wrong in sequence to blame the school.