The following are numbers related to children ages 0-14. You will never see these numbers in media completely dominated by the 'wacky'Left. The numbers would convince any rational person that their children need to be in school this coming year.
500 children die every year from the seasonal flu.
1200 children are killed each year in roadside fatalities.
700 children drown each year.
The 'clincher' to send our children back to school is only 86 children have died to what has been 'linked' to the coronavirus.
The month of August will fly by faster than I can run the 40. Our children need to be standing pledging allegiance to the flag to begin their 2020-2021 school year!
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
The following are numbers related to children ages 0-14. You will never see these numbers in media completely dominated by the 'wacky'Left. The numbers would convince any rational person that their children need to be in school this coming year.
500 children die every year from the seasonal flu.
1200 children are killed each year in roadside fatalities.
700 children drown each year.
The 'clincher' to send our children back to school is only 86 children have died to what has been 'linked' to the coronavirus.
The month of August will fly by faster than I can run the 40. Our children need to be standing pledging allegiance to the flag to begin their 2020-2021 school year!
Israel is in some ways an outlier among other countries for how poorly their school reopening effort went. The problem, experts say: lack of compliance on social distancing and masks + too broad of a reopening for the rest of society.
WOW.....if Israeli kids aren't listening, do you expect American kids to do so?
Israel is in some ways an outlier among other countries for how poorly their school reopening effort went. The problem, experts say: lack of compliance on social distancing and masks + too broad of a reopening for the rest of society.
WOW.....if Israeli kids aren't listening, do you expect American kids to do so?
Not getting the idea of the paramount importance of having kids in the school. I see the drawbacks of online classes but unless you can guarantee the kids won’t transmit the illness in significant numbers, think we should take off and have them do other things through the fall.
Not getting the idea of the paramount importance of having kids in the school. I see the drawbacks of online classes but unless you can guarantee the kids won’t transmit the illness in significant numbers, think we should take off and have them do other things through the fall.
Not getting the idea of the paramount importance of having kids in the school. I see the drawbacks of online classes but unless you can guarantee the kids won’t transmit the illness in significant numbers, think we should take off and have them do other things through the fall.
This adds to current evidence that children do not appear to be drivers of transmission, and we argue that reopening schools should be considered safe accompanied by certain measures.
There is little about coronavirus we can be absolutely sure of – this is a brand new disease and our knowledge grows by the day - but most of the available evidence so far strongly suggests that children are neither suffering from coronavirus nor spreading it. Studies in South Korea, Iceland, Italy, Japan, France, China, the Netherlands and Australia all concur that youngsters are “not implicated significantly in transmitting Covid”, not even to parents and siblings.
the Wall Street Journalpublished this article titled Is It Safe to Reopen Schools? These Countries Say Yes.To me, this reads as a bit of a litmus test for countries that have independent and data-driven public health officials, and I give the U.S. an ‘F” for our current approach:
Quote Originally Posted by shiek:
Not getting the idea of the paramount importance of having kids in the school. I see the drawbacks of online classes but unless you can guarantee the kids won’t transmit the illness in significant numbers, think we should take off and have them do other things through the fall.
This adds to current evidence that children do not appear to be drivers of transmission, and we argue that reopening schools should be considered safe accompanied by certain measures.
There is little about coronavirus we can be absolutely sure of – this is a brand new disease and our knowledge grows by the day - but most of the available evidence so far strongly suggests that children are neither suffering from coronavirus nor spreading it. Studies in South Korea, Iceland, Italy, Japan, France, China, the Netherlands and Australia all concur that youngsters are “not implicated significantly in transmitting Covid”, not even to parents and siblings.
the Wall Street Journalpublished this article titled Is It Safe to Reopen Schools? These Countries Say Yes.To me, this reads as a bit of a litmus test for countries that have independent and data-driven public health officials, and I give the U.S. an ‘F” for our current approach:
But Denmark, Austria, Norway, Finland, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and most other countries that have reopened classrooms haven’t had outbreaks in schools or day-care centers…In Denmark, the opening of schools had no impact on the progress of the epidemic, said Tyra Grove Krause, a senior official with the State Serum Institute, the country’s disease control agency…Since Austria reopened on May 18, no increase in infections has been observed in schools and kindergartens, a spokesman for the government said…In Norway, the government won’t close schools again even if the number of cases starts rising in the country because there have been no negative consequences from reopening schools on April 20, said Education Minister Guri Melby.
How many more countries need to re-open before the U.S. follows? Seriously, it’s a little embarrassing to be American…IMO we look like total chumps.
Dr. Scott Atlas doubled-down on June 1st with this great Op-Ed, titled Science says: 'Open the schools'. As usual, he’s amazingly eloquent, here’s an excerpt but well worth the time to read every word, he simply slays it:
All of this borders on the absurd, when we now know that social distancing and face coverings for children are completely unnecessary.
Never have schools subjected children to such an unhealthy, uncomfortable and anti-educational environment, so science cannot precisely define the total harm it will cause. But science does tell us that risks from COVID-19 are too minimal to sacrifice the educational, social, emotional and physical well-being – to say nothing of the very health – of our young people.
But Denmark, Austria, Norway, Finland, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and most other countries that have reopened classrooms haven’t had outbreaks in schools or day-care centers…In Denmark, the opening of schools had no impact on the progress of the epidemic, said Tyra Grove Krause, a senior official with the State Serum Institute, the country’s disease control agency…Since Austria reopened on May 18, no increase in infections has been observed in schools and kindergartens, a spokesman for the government said…In Norway, the government won’t close schools again even if the number of cases starts rising in the country because there have been no negative consequences from reopening schools on April 20, said Education Minister Guri Melby.
How many more countries need to re-open before the U.S. follows? Seriously, it’s a little embarrassing to be American…IMO we look like total chumps.
Dr. Scott Atlas doubled-down on June 1st with this great Op-Ed, titled Science says: 'Open the schools'. As usual, he’s amazingly eloquent, here’s an excerpt but well worth the time to read every word, he simply slays it:
All of this borders on the absurd, when we now know that social distancing and face coverings for children are completely unnecessary.
Never have schools subjected children to such an unhealthy, uncomfortable and anti-educational environment, so science cannot precisely define the total harm it will cause. But science does tell us that risks from COVID-19 are too minimal to sacrifice the educational, social, emotional and physical well-being – to say nothing of the very health – of our young people.
It’s certainly true that reopening our schools, however carefully, could increase transmission of the virus. Some countries that have done so—Israel and France, for instance—did see clusters of infections among students and staff. But these outbreaks were both small and expected, officials in both countries told the press; and the evidence suggests that the risks, overall, are very low.
Let’s review some facts: Children are, by and large, spared the effects of the virus. According to the latest data from the CDC, infants, little kids, and teenagers together have accounted for roughly 5 percent of all confirmed cases, and 0.06 percent of all reported deaths. The Covid-linked child inflammatory syndrome that received fervent media attention last month, while scary, has even more infinitesimal numbers. “Many serious childhood diseases are worse, both in possible outcomes and prevalence,” said Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics at Northwell Health in New York. Russell Viner, president of the UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, noted that the syndrome was not “relevant” to any discussion related to schools.
Yes. They are mentioned, we looked at them in particular:
It’s certainly true that reopening our schools, however carefully, could increase transmission of the virus. Some countries that have done so—Israel and France, for instance—did see clusters of infections among students and staff. But these outbreaks were both small and expected, officials in both countries told the press; and the evidence suggests that the risks, overall, are very low.
Let’s review some facts: Children are, by and large, spared the effects of the virus. According to the latest data from the CDC, infants, little kids, and teenagers together have accounted for roughly 5 percent of all confirmed cases, and 0.06 percent of all reported deaths. The Covid-linked child inflammatory syndrome that received fervent media attention last month, while scary, has even more infinitesimal numbers. “Many serious childhood diseases are worse, both in possible outcomes and prevalence,” said Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics at Northwell Health in New York. Russell Viner, president of the UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, noted that the syndrome was not “relevant” to any discussion related to schools.
Yes. They are mentioned, we looked at them in particular: https://www.wired.com/story/its-ridiculous-to-treat-schools-like-covid-hot-zones/ It’s certainly true that reopening our schools, however carefully, could increase transmission of the virus. Some countries that have done so—Israel and France, for instance—did see clusters of infections among students and staff. But these outbreaks were both small and expected, officials in both countries told the press; and the evidence suggests that the risks, overall, are very low. Let’s review some facts: Children are, by and large, spared the effects of the virus. According to the latest data from the CDC, infants, little kids, and teenagers together have accounted for roughly 5 percent of all confirmed cases, and 0.06 percent of all reported deaths. The Covid-linked child inflammatory syndrome that received fervent media attention last month, while scary, has even more infinitesimal numbers. “Many serious childhood diseases are worse, both in possible outcomes and prevalence,” said Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics at Northwell Health in New York. Russell Viner, president of the UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, noted that the syndrome was not “relevant” to any discussion related to schools.
Very cavalier there, bro. Do you have school aged children or grand children? I'd be very interested to see how many of those pushing for schools to reopen, specifically the politicians, how many have school aged kids or grandkids. And how many of those are in a public, or even a high occupancy private school, setting. Probably very few. To make a statement like, "Kids are, by and large, spared the effects..." is somewhat asinine when you consider that we have yet to even fully grasp the effects. There's a good chance of serious long term damage to lungs and other organs. You could be fucking these kids lifes before thet even start. And for what? The economy? An election? It's definitelt not about the kids. Here's a news flash. Our schools, "by and large", suck. Our kids, "by and large", are stupid. And getting dumber with every passing year. You may think this is all the more reason that we need kids in school but I promise you, it is not. Delaying the start, or even better, implementing classless curriculum for the first month or two will not make a huge difference. Best case scenario is that it forces parents to take a more active role in their kids' education, seeing as how so few do so these days. I want the country back to normal as much as the next guy but at what cost? Playing politics with the lifes of children? No, thank you.
R.I.P. #94 MARSHAWN KNEELAND - DC4L
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Yes. They are mentioned, we looked at them in particular: https://www.wired.com/story/its-ridiculous-to-treat-schools-like-covid-hot-zones/ It’s certainly true that reopening our schools, however carefully, could increase transmission of the virus. Some countries that have done so—Israel and France, for instance—did see clusters of infections among students and staff. But these outbreaks were both small and expected, officials in both countries told the press; and the evidence suggests that the risks, overall, are very low. Let’s review some facts: Children are, by and large, spared the effects of the virus. According to the latest data from the CDC, infants, little kids, and teenagers together have accounted for roughly 5 percent of all confirmed cases, and 0.06 percent of all reported deaths. The Covid-linked child inflammatory syndrome that received fervent media attention last month, while scary, has even more infinitesimal numbers. “Many serious childhood diseases are worse, both in possible outcomes and prevalence,” said Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics at Northwell Health in New York. Russell Viner, president of the UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, noted that the syndrome was not “relevant” to any discussion related to schools.
Very cavalier there, bro. Do you have school aged children or grand children? I'd be very interested to see how many of those pushing for schools to reopen, specifically the politicians, how many have school aged kids or grandkids. And how many of those are in a public, or even a high occupancy private school, setting. Probably very few. To make a statement like, "Kids are, by and large, spared the effects..." is somewhat asinine when you consider that we have yet to even fully grasp the effects. There's a good chance of serious long term damage to lungs and other organs. You could be fucking these kids lifes before thet even start. And for what? The economy? An election? It's definitelt not about the kids. Here's a news flash. Our schools, "by and large", suck. Our kids, "by and large", are stupid. And getting dumber with every passing year. You may think this is all the more reason that we need kids in school but I promise you, it is not. Delaying the start, or even better, implementing classless curriculum for the first month or two will not make a huge difference. Best case scenario is that it forces parents to take a more active role in their kids' education, seeing as how so few do so these days. I want the country back to normal as much as the next guy but at what cost? Playing politics with the lifes of children? No, thank you.
Not my words. The studies and the scientists and sociologists that are studying this issue are saying this. The numbers simply do not reflect the need for the ‘adult paranoia’ (I think the article called it that).
Kids are not being shown to have effects (long or short), are not super-spreaders, and are not dying from it.
The countries that have opened already have demonstrated this.
I don't think they are trying to be cavalier. Just trying to present facts. The media are simply riling up the emotional side of this is all.
Some of the articles talk about the long-lasting effects of the fear in the kids and isolation coupled with a weakened immune system (from being isolated) as additional factors to reopen.
Was fairly interesting in one to see how the younger the folks were when surveyed about their age group and the mortality rate and effects — the younger they were the more they exaggerated it. By up to a factor of 200+. That is not reality. That is ‘adult paranoia’ being pushed onto these kids. Along with the media frenzy.
Hard to say they are being asinine about it when the empirical proof is in the pudding thus far.
Not my words. The studies and the scientists and sociologists that are studying this issue are saying this. The numbers simply do not reflect the need for the ‘adult paranoia’ (I think the article called it that).
Kids are not being shown to have effects (long or short), are not super-spreaders, and are not dying from it.
The countries that have opened already have demonstrated this.
I don't think they are trying to be cavalier. Just trying to present facts. The media are simply riling up the emotional side of this is all.
Some of the articles talk about the long-lasting effects of the fear in the kids and isolation coupled with a weakened immune system (from being isolated) as additional factors to reopen.
Was fairly interesting in one to see how the younger the folks were when surveyed about their age group and the mortality rate and effects — the younger they were the more they exaggerated it. By up to a factor of 200+. That is not reality. That is ‘adult paranoia’ being pushed onto these kids. Along with the media frenzy.
Hard to say they are being asinine about it when the empirical proof is in the pudding thus far.
How can it be said that there are no shown longterm effects when we haven't even made it to that point yet. Have we even gone back and examined survivors of the SARS CoV1 outbreak to see if there has been long term damage? Seems like a common sense thing to do. And how can it be said that children are not super spreaders when so few are tested because at this point, the only people getting tested are those exhibiting symptoms and those who have been in contact with a known carrier. So while, to you own words, "kids are shown to have effects", we really at this point have no way of knowing how many are asymptomatic carriers.
Look, I believe there's no replacement for in class learning, especially for younger children. However, as i've said, we, our government, our country et al, can't all of a sudden start acting like we care about the kids and there education. If we did, we wouldn't be falling behind many other countries in regards to education. If we did, it wouldn't be so hard to get politicians to open up those purse strings. We've seen some of the ridiculous things both sides have tried to sneak into these relief bills. Has either proposed anything for schools? Not just testing but long term benefits, educational resources. An investment in our kids rather than illegals or freakin' 377 million in White House upgrades. This issue has nothing to do with the kids and is being used as nothing more than a political play. And as i've said, that is being very cavalier with the lifes and well being of children. Why? To make a sitting President look better? For the "economy"? It's a joke.
R.I.P. #94 MARSHAWN KNEELAND - DC4L
How can it be said that there are no shown longterm effects when we haven't even made it to that point yet. Have we even gone back and examined survivors of the SARS CoV1 outbreak to see if there has been long term damage? Seems like a common sense thing to do. And how can it be said that children are not super spreaders when so few are tested because at this point, the only people getting tested are those exhibiting symptoms and those who have been in contact with a known carrier. So while, to you own words, "kids are shown to have effects", we really at this point have no way of knowing how many are asymptomatic carriers.
Look, I believe there's no replacement for in class learning, especially for younger children. However, as i've said, we, our government, our country et al, can't all of a sudden start acting like we care about the kids and there education. If we did, we wouldn't be falling behind many other countries in regards to education. If we did, it wouldn't be so hard to get politicians to open up those purse strings. We've seen some of the ridiculous things both sides have tried to sneak into these relief bills. Has either proposed anything for schools? Not just testing but long term benefits, educational resources. An investment in our kids rather than illegals or freakin' 377 million in White House upgrades. This issue has nothing to do with the kids and is being used as nothing more than a political play. And as i've said, that is being very cavalier with the lifes and well being of children. Why? To make a sitting President look better? For the "economy"? It's a joke.
I understand your angst. But I would encourage you to read the studies, look at the papers, and then look at where they have reopened schools. How long would you want to wait to continue to study and examine this for possible long term effects, and to verify that kids are not spreaders? You cannot do this. We did not do it for swine flu and we know there were long term effects. We did not do it for Spanish Flu and we know there were long term effects. Absolutely it is being done for political and economic reasons and not for kids — kids are not the issue and the data proves this.
By and large this is over. Look at Europe now. Look above, say, the 35th parallel here. We now can graph it and see it as we do all the seasonal-type issues. The IFR and Farr’s law all now indicate clearly where we are. We now suspect the herd immunity is in the range of 20-30, not the 60-70 we first thought.
It is clearly time for kids to go back to school. Sure, start above 35th if you like. Sure, have some safe guards in place if you like. But the science says there is no reason to needlessly drag this out. More kids die of lots of other things and we are ‘cavalier’ about them if you want to word it that way.
I understand your angst. But I would encourage you to read the studies, look at the papers, and then look at where they have reopened schools. How long would you want to wait to continue to study and examine this for possible long term effects, and to verify that kids are not spreaders? You cannot do this. We did not do it for swine flu and we know there were long term effects. We did not do it for Spanish Flu and we know there were long term effects. Absolutely it is being done for political and economic reasons and not for kids — kids are not the issue and the data proves this.
By and large this is over. Look at Europe now. Look above, say, the 35th parallel here. We now can graph it and see it as we do all the seasonal-type issues. The IFR and Farr’s law all now indicate clearly where we are. We now suspect the herd immunity is in the range of 20-30, not the 60-70 we first thought.
It is clearly time for kids to go back to school. Sure, start above 35th if you like. Sure, have some safe guards in place if you like. But the science says there is no reason to needlessly drag this out. More kids die of lots of other things and we are ‘cavalier’ about them if you want to word it that way.
While experts note that the precise transmission dynamics between children, or between children and adults, are “not well understood”—and indeed, some argue that the best evidence on this question is that “we do not have enough evidence”
That's from the article you cited. And this is really my only point. You speak of "imperical data" from limited studies done in European nations that have done a much better job, in general, than us of managing Covid and flattening the curve. We can't even agree if this thing is real or not. We compare masks to shackles. We fight....for our right.... to paaaar-tay!! And because of all this, as many countries are controlling the spread, we are seeing an uptick in many regions. We have not flattened our curve. Take the New York tri-state area and Washington state out of the equation and we really haven't flattened our curve. Couple that with the fact that we are a chronically obese and unhealthy country to begin with and i'm sorry, but I can't accept, "...but look how well it's going in Europe." Especially when this argument has nothing to do with kids and everything to do with an election. Screw that. I'd rather err on the side of caution. We still know very little about this thing. We haven't even gotten testing nailed down.
R.I.P. #94 MARSHAWN KNEELAND - DC4L
While experts note that the precise transmission dynamics between children, or between children and adults, are “not well understood”—and indeed, some argue that the best evidence on this question is that “we do not have enough evidence”
That's from the article you cited. And this is really my only point. You speak of "imperical data" from limited studies done in European nations that have done a much better job, in general, than us of managing Covid and flattening the curve. We can't even agree if this thing is real or not. We compare masks to shackles. We fight....for our right.... to paaaar-tay!! And because of all this, as many countries are controlling the spread, we are seeing an uptick in many regions. We have not flattened our curve. Take the New York tri-state area and Washington state out of the equation and we really haven't flattened our curve. Couple that with the fact that we are a chronically obese and unhealthy country to begin with and i'm sorry, but I can't accept, "...but look how well it's going in Europe." Especially when this argument has nothing to do with kids and everything to do with an election. Screw that. I'd rather err on the side of caution. We still know very little about this thing. We haven't even gotten testing nailed down.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Yes. They are mentioned, we looked at them in particular: https://www.wired.com/story/its-ridiculous-to-treat-schools-like-covid-hot-zones/ It’s certainly true that reopening our schools, however carefully, could increase transmission of the virus. Some countries that have done so—Israel and France, for instance—did see clusters of infections among students and staff. But these outbreaks were both small and expected, officials in both countries told the press; and the evidence suggests that the risks, overall, are very low. Let’s review some facts: Children are, by and large, spared the effects of the virus. According to the latest data from the CDC, infants, little kids, and teenagers together have accounted for roughly 5 percent of all confirmed cases, and 0.06 percent of all reported deaths. The Covid-linked child inflammatory syndrome that received fervent media attention last month, while scary, has even more infinitesimal numbers. “Many serious childhood diseases are worse, both in possible outcomes and prevalence,” said Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics at Northwell Health in New York. Russell Viner, president of the UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, noted that the syndrome was not “relevant” to any discussion related to schools. Very cavalier there, bro. Do you have school aged children or grand children? I'd be very interested to see how many of those pushing for schools to reopen, specifically the politicians, how many have school aged kids or grandkids. And how many of those are in a public, or even a high occupancy private school, setting. Probably very few. To make a statement like, "Kids are, by and large, spared the effects..." is somewhat asinine when you consider that we have yet to even fully grasp the effects. There's a good chance of serious long term damage to lungs and other organs. You could be fucking these kids lifes before thet even start. And for what? The economy? An election? It's definitelt not about the kids. Here's a news flash. Our schools, "by and large", suck. Our kids, "by and large", are stupid. And getting dumber with every passing year. You may think this is all the more reason that we need kids in school but I promise you, it is not. Delaying the start, or even better, implementing classless curriculum for the first month or two will not make a huge difference. Best case scenario is that it forces parents to take a more active role in their kids' education, seeing as how so few do so these days. I want the country back to normal as much as the next guy but at what cost? Playing politics with the lifes of children? No, thank you.
Stump, you are always the most astute guy on this forum. Kudo's
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: Yes. They are mentioned, we looked at them in particular: https://www.wired.com/story/its-ridiculous-to-treat-schools-like-covid-hot-zones/ It’s certainly true that reopening our schools, however carefully, could increase transmission of the virus. Some countries that have done so—Israel and France, for instance—did see clusters of infections among students and staff. But these outbreaks were both small and expected, officials in both countries told the press; and the evidence suggests that the risks, overall, are very low. Let’s review some facts: Children are, by and large, spared the effects of the virus. According to the latest data from the CDC, infants, little kids, and teenagers together have accounted for roughly 5 percent of all confirmed cases, and 0.06 percent of all reported deaths. The Covid-linked child inflammatory syndrome that received fervent media attention last month, while scary, has even more infinitesimal numbers. “Many serious childhood diseases are worse, both in possible outcomes and prevalence,” said Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics at Northwell Health in New York. Russell Viner, president of the UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, noted that the syndrome was not “relevant” to any discussion related to schools. Very cavalier there, bro. Do you have school aged children or grand children? I'd be very interested to see how many of those pushing for schools to reopen, specifically the politicians, how many have school aged kids or grandkids. And how many of those are in a public, or even a high occupancy private school, setting. Probably very few. To make a statement like, "Kids are, by and large, spared the effects..." is somewhat asinine when you consider that we have yet to even fully grasp the effects. There's a good chance of serious long term damage to lungs and other organs. You could be fucking these kids lifes before thet even start. And for what? The economy? An election? It's definitelt not about the kids. Here's a news flash. Our schools, "by and large", suck. Our kids, "by and large", are stupid. And getting dumber with every passing year. You may think this is all the more reason that we need kids in school but I promise you, it is not. Delaying the start, or even better, implementing classless curriculum for the first month or two will not make a huge difference. Best case scenario is that it forces parents to take a more active role in their kids' education, seeing as how so few do so these days. I want the country back to normal as much as the next guy but at what cost? Playing politics with the lifes of children? No, thank you.
Stump, you are always the most astute guy on this forum. Kudo's
While experts note that the precise transmission dynamics between children, or between children and adults, are “not well understood”—and indeed, some argue that the best evidence on this question is that “we do not have enough evidence” That's from the article you cited. And this is really my only point. You speak of "imperical data" from limited studies done in European nations that have done a much better job, in general, than us of managing Covid and flattening the curve. We can't even agree if this thing is real or not. We compare masks to shackles. We fight....for our right.... to paaaar-tay!! And because of all this, as many countries are controlling the spread, we are seeing an uptick in many regions. We have not flattened our curve. Take the New York tri-state area and Washington state out of the equation and we really haven't flattened our curve. Couple that with the fact that we are a chronically obese and unhealthy country to begin with and i'm sorry, but I can't accept, "...but look how well it's going in Europe." Especially when this argument has nothing to do with kids and everything to do with an election. Screw that. I'd rather err on the side of caution. We still know very little about this thing. We haven't even gotten testing nailed down.
Absolutely the curves are flattened. As I say above 35 we are done. Basically, flattened below now as well. I think they grouped all of CA together. IFR is the key, as Farr says: Deaths are what matter, everything else can only be inferred. The charts and links are there for anyone to see. The problem is if it is not your arena it may be unclear. The average fellow is just agitated by the media and politicians. As scientists and researchers we simply cannot care about politics -- it is all data-driven.
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
While experts note that the precise transmission dynamics between children, or between children and adults, are “not well understood”—and indeed, some argue that the best evidence on this question is that “we do not have enough evidence” That's from the article you cited. And this is really my only point. You speak of "imperical data" from limited studies done in European nations that have done a much better job, in general, than us of managing Covid and flattening the curve. We can't even agree if this thing is real or not. We compare masks to shackles. We fight....for our right.... to paaaar-tay!! And because of all this, as many countries are controlling the spread, we are seeing an uptick in many regions. We have not flattened our curve. Take the New York tri-state area and Washington state out of the equation and we really haven't flattened our curve. Couple that with the fact that we are a chronically obese and unhealthy country to begin with and i'm sorry, but I can't accept, "...but look how well it's going in Europe." Especially when this argument has nothing to do with kids and everything to do with an election. Screw that. I'd rather err on the side of caution. We still know very little about this thing. We haven't even gotten testing nailed down.
Absolutely the curves are flattened. As I say above 35 we are done. Basically, flattened below now as well. I think they grouped all of CA together. IFR is the key, as Farr says: Deaths are what matter, everything else can only be inferred. The charts and links are there for anyone to see. The problem is if it is not your arena it may be unclear. The average fellow is just agitated by the media and politicians. As scientists and researchers we simply cannot care about politics -- it is all data-driven.
“I’m a practicing psychiatrist who specializes in anxiety disorders, paranoid delusions, and irrational fear. I’ve been treating this in individuals as a specialist. It’s hard enough to contain these problems in normal times. What’s happening now is a spread of this serious medical condition to the whole population. It can happen with anything but here we see a primal fear of disease turning into mass panic. It seems almost deliberate. It is tragic. Once this starts, it could take years to repair the psychological damage.”
This is one that talks about how the kids have been so scared they have an exaggerated idea of the effects on them:
Perhaps the most destructive element of lockdown is the panic and fear that such severe measures help confirm, in this case, wrongly so, in the minds of the young and impressionable. As the paper concludes, “Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.” In other words, we need to flatten the fear.
I thought that survey was bad enough, but a different survey by Kekst CNC asking different questions revealed a simply astonishing figure: Americans over-estimated the TOTAL number of compatriots who have died from COVID-19 by 200-fold! When asked the question (in mid-July), “How many people in your country have died from the Coronavirus?”, Americans responded “9%,” which would be roughly 30,000,000 people, versus the actual number of 151,000. No wonder people are panicked (and wildly, wildly misinformed.)
This is one of the sites we use and you can follow this link to some of the things I reference on here:
“I’m a practicing psychiatrist who specializes in anxiety disorders, paranoid delusions, and irrational fear. I’ve been treating this in individuals as a specialist. It’s hard enough to contain these problems in normal times. What’s happening now is a spread of this serious medical condition to the whole population. It can happen with anything but here we see a primal fear of disease turning into mass panic. It seems almost deliberate. It is tragic. Once this starts, it could take years to repair the psychological damage.”
This is one that talks about how the kids have been so scared they have an exaggerated idea of the effects on them:
Perhaps the most destructive element of lockdown is the panic and fear that such severe measures help confirm, in this case, wrongly so, in the minds of the young and impressionable. As the paper concludes, “Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.” In other words, we need to flatten the fear.
I thought that survey was bad enough, but a different survey by Kekst CNC asking different questions revealed a simply astonishing figure: Americans over-estimated the TOTAL number of compatriots who have died from COVID-19 by 200-fold! When asked the question (in mid-July), “How many people in your country have died from the Coronavirus?”, Americans responded “9%,” which would be roughly 30,000,000 people, versus the actual number of 151,000. No wonder people are panicked (and wildly, wildly misinformed.)
Infection Fatality Rate: The “IFR”, unlike the “Case Fatality Rate” that is more often quoted in the news, is the ACTUAL fatality rate of COVID-19. In order to accurately forecast the IFR, you need two bits of data: total deaths, and total people who have had the virus. The second data point is harder to find, because so many people are asymptomatic, but the most reliable data I have found is in this meta-analysis by Stanford’s Dr. John Ioannidis titled, The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data. What does the paper conclude? A median IFR of 0.25%. It’s hard to make this point strongly enough: a virus with an IFR this low would never, ever merit the response we’ve seen from health authorities and elected officials. COVID-19 is hardly a “once in a century pandemic” as some try to say, it’s a strong flu bug, nothing more.
Infection Fatality Rate: The “IFR”, unlike the “Case Fatality Rate” that is more often quoted in the news, is the ACTUAL fatality rate of COVID-19. In order to accurately forecast the IFR, you need two bits of data: total deaths, and total people who have had the virus. The second data point is harder to find, because so many people are asymptomatic, but the most reliable data I have found is in this meta-analysis by Stanford’s Dr. John Ioannidis titled, The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data. What does the paper conclude? A median IFR of 0.25%. It’s hard to make this point strongly enough: a virus with an IFR this low would never, ever merit the response we’ve seen from health authorities and elected officials. COVID-19 is hardly a “once in a century pandemic” as some try to say, it’s a strong flu bug, nothing more.
Hot Forum Topics
