acowboys62 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 1 minute ago, MookieMonstah said: You can dismiss facts and science when it doesn't effect other people. Most people don't think obese people are bad people or selfish. Not wearing a mask is selfish, ignoring the science behind it endangers other people. A better comparison would've been drunk drivers. Apply whatever scenario you'd like, you get the concept, therefore you got the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 Just now, vikesfan89 said: I mostly just had a problem with saying that we would be sentencing. 02% of the population to death if we open the schools up when according to the current data and projections that is far from true. Sending kids to school is not just about kids. We have to also account for exposure to teachers, parents, and then the secondary exposures that occur when those teachers/parents infect other people. Estimating the death rate of opening schools up as the COVID-19 death rate in children is not accurate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acowboys62 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 14 minutes ago, MookieMonstah said: We have a vaccine for the flu. That comparison is silly, and you know it. We have preventable measures for the flu. You say you don't have an opinion, but it seems quite clear that you do. I'm just looking for an explanation as to why we should risk thousands of kids health and well being, along with teachers and other staff so we can open schools. Remote learning isn't on par with in the classroom stuff but its certainly viable until we have a vaccine. Do you disagree? If so, why? Im willing to discuss and hear you out. Do kids have to get it for school? I can't recall ever having to, but I can't remember that far ago and have no kids. I would image it is advisable among teachers and staff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 Why are we comparing this to the flu? This isn’t the flu. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: Why are we comparing this to the flu? This isn’t the flu. I get the idea of trying to set our bearings for the risk/reward on opening schools in general. But that requires a thorough analysis of all of the side effects of opening a school, which people who are comparing this to flu are not doing. The end result of an honest comparison between the impact of opening schools up in COVID or in a flu breakout should be exactly how you ended your post: "this isn't the flu". Edited July 16, 2020 by ramssuperbowl99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 6 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Sending kids to school is not just about kids. We have to also account for exposure to teachers, parents, and then the secondary exposures that occur when those teachers/parents infect other people. Estimating the death rate of opening schools up as the COVID-19 death rate in children is not accurate. Ok. That doesn't change the fact that he claimed that every kid will get covid and .02% will die as fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: I get the idea of trying to set our bearings for the risk/reward on opening schools in general. But that requires a thorough analysis of all of the side effects of opening a school, which people who are comparing this to flu are not doing. The end result of an honest comparison between the impact of opening schools up in COVID or in a flu breakout should be exactly how you ended your post: "this isn't the flu". Out of likes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 Just now, vikesfan89 said: Ok. That doesn't change the fact that he claimed that every kid will get covid and .02% will die as fact except that isn't what he claimed. Man, do you ever do your own even cursory research before you post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: I get the idea of trying to set our bearings for the risk/reward on opening schools in general. But that requires a thorough analysis of all of the side effects of opening a school, which people who are comparing this to flu are not doing. it's more of the, "any deaths is too many" thing for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 Just now, vikesfan89 said: Ok. That doesn't change the fact that he claimed that every kid will get covid and .02% will die as fact I understand, but the first part of risk/reward is quantifying the risk. When the decision is to re-open schools or keep them closed, we need some idea of the real death rate with or without opening schools. That difference is the risk. Then we have to pit that against the reward. Without that data, it's tough to have the type of conversation your post was getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 1 minute ago, vikesfan89 said: it's more of the, "any deaths is too many" thing for me That's also not what is being argued. Any *preventable* deaths are too many. It's nuanced, but important in this instance. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 Just now, vikesfan89 said: it's more of the, "any deaths is too many" thing for me I read @MookieMonstah's comment not as absolute-ist, "I won't accept any deaths under any circumstances". I read it as "given what we know today, it seems like we might be able to get away with not having any of those COVID deaths, so why are we debating policies where anyone would die?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, JDBrocks said: except that isn't what he claimed. Man, do you ever do your own even cursory research before you post? "02% of current students would be almost 11,500 kids dead. Insane we're going to sentence almost 12k kids to death." He's claiming 11,500 kids will die which is .02% of the student population in assuming. How do you interpret that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, JDBrocks said: That's also not what is being argued. Any *preventable* deaths are too many. It's nuanced, but important in this instance. fair enough. At this point I don't think and action is going to prevent a certain number of deaths though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 Just now, vikesfan89 said: "02% of current students would be almost 11,500 kids dead. Insane we're going to sentence almost 12k kids to death." He's claiming 11,500 kids will die which is .02% of the student population in assuming. How do you interpret that? I certainly don't interpret that to mean that every child is going to get infected. Do the math - do you think that there are only ~11500 kids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts