Schools closed until February? (part 3)

Deeec

jrosen wrote: »

Deeec wrote: »

r.

Personally I feel the child/teacher should be named.

No one has any right to know any medical information about any other person. The child/children/teacher or teachers have a right to privacy. There is zero need to name anyone anyway. It doesnt matter who has covid, once the proper steps are taken regarding control

I would agree with you in ordinary times. We are in very different times now and to beat covid we need to stop the spread. The proper steps it would appear are not being taken - Contact tracing is a shambles. If everyone was given proper info we could decide for ourselves if we were in contact with the person and not be relying on the HSE to tell us.

JP100

meeeeh wrote: »

It could be 92 people.

25 identified outbreaks in schools the week before that and 12 outbreaks identified the week before that. Covid transmission in schools is become more and more significant.

kippy

JP100 wrote: »

25 identified outbreaks in schools the week before that and 12 outbreaks identified the week before that. Covid transmission in schools is become more and more significant.

Cases are rising everywhere - of course there will be more cases in schools....

wirelessdude01

kippy wrote: »

Is it any different to cases in the community?

We aren't talking about cases though, these are clusters/outbreaks.

wirelessdude01

See the GPs have been told to hold off on referring all these close contacts for testing. Saw a GP say it on twitter.

JP100

kippy wrote: »

Is it any different to cases in the community?

Well yes, as we're also constantly told that schools are low risk, controlled environments in which the virus has less leeway to take hold. Latest figures suggest otherwise.

JP100

JP100 wrote: »

25 identified outbreaks in schools the week before that and 12 outbreaks identified the week before that. Covid transmission in schools is become more and more significant.

There were nearly 7000 cases last week. The fact there were only 46 outbreaks in schools attended by 20% of our population doesn't look particularly high

kippy

JP100 wrote: »

Well yes, as we're constantly told that schools are low risk, controlled environments in which the virus has less leeway to take hold. Latest figures suggest otherwise.

Latest figures suggest that as virus cases rise, virus cases rise........
Schools are "low risk" so long as spread in the community is somewhat controlled. Hence the move to reducing spread in the community.

JP100

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There were nearly 7000 cases last week. The fact there were only 46 outbreaks in schools attended by 20% of our population doesn't look particularly high

You can dance around the head of a pin all you like but the fact is known outbreaks in schools almost doubled in a week. That is certainly something to take note of rather than your nothing to see here at all, folks, approach.

Thats me

kippy wrote: »

Cases are rising everywhere - of course there will be more cases in schools....

But it is not raising THAT fast.

This is extract from XLS obtained in https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/download-todays-data-geographic-distribution-covid-19-cases-worldwide - sums of new cases per periods of 7 days:


14-Oct...20-Oct 8097
7-Oct...13-Oct 5184
30-Sep...6-Oct 3235
23-Sep...29-Sep 2296

Smacruairi

JP100 wrote: »

You can dance around the head of a pin all you like but the fact is known outbreaks in schools almost doubled in a week. That is certainly something to take note of of rather than your nothing to see here at all, folks, approach.

Sure the above poster said level 3 had effectively sorted Dublin, nothing to see here... Then disappeared when the cases rose again.

kippy

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

We aren't talking about cases though, these are clusters/outbreaks.

Again, I've said above that if you attach 10 people to each outbreak, that's less than 500 people out of a cases load of close to 9000 in the week.
Which is a relatively low percentage.

Thats me

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

We aren't talking about cases though, these are clusters/outbreaks.

So raise is even sharper?

wirelessdude01

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There were nearly 7000 cases last week. The fact there were only 46 outbreaks in schools attended by 20% of our population doesn't look particularly high

Stop trying to muddy the waters and missing cases in when the post is about clusters.

There were 646 clusters last week.
Now a cluster is 2 or more cases.

Would be great to see some detail on the clusters in schools. I had hoped this would be forthcoming yesterday when I heard that Heather Burns was going to be at the presser seeing as schools is her focus but alas it wasn't to be.

Schools are a huge focus at the moment so you would imagine they would present some data to ease people's fears/imaginations.

The way they are approaching the whole school thing smacks of a 'trust us' mentality without presenting any reason to trust them.

We trusted them as in the Govt, the HSE to have a fit for purpose system that could handle things. Instead what we have is Leo thinking he is in opposition and trying to score points off the government which ironically he is second in command of.

Smegging hell

https://twitter.com/dlooney/status/1318940496975233027

JP100

kippy wrote: »

Latest figures suggest that as virus cases rise, virus cases rise........
Schools are "low risk" so long as spread in the community is somewhat controlled. Hence the move to reducing spread in the community.

Outbreaks and that's just known outbreaks almost doubling in a week doesn't strike me as low risk. I would also suggest that if you were around some of those 46 outbreaks, you wouldn't be describing them as low risk.

meeeeh

JP100 wrote: »

25 identified outbreaks in schools the week before that and 12 outbreaks identified the week before that. Covid transmission in schools is become more and more significant.

I'm not disputing that and if level 5 is working then they should go down. If it's not then we are f****d anyway.

khalessi

JP100 wrote: »

Outbreaks and that's just known outbreaks almost doubling in a week doesn't strike me as low risk. I would also suggest that if you were around some of those 46 outbreaks, you wouldn't be describing them as low risk.

It is amazing that now the spotlight is moving to schools and a breakdown of numbers is asked for that surprise surprise case numbers have risen again for 2 weeks in a row.

JP100

Smegging hell wrote: »

https://twitter.com/dlooney/status/1318940496975233027

The above is exactly why I repeatedly used 'identified' and 'known' when describing outbreaks in schools as it's quite clear there's alot of shenanigans going on around schools and to the health risk of all of our children, their extended families and all school staff. That is something I could never defend or stand over but it is something quite a number of posters in this thread are quite willing to do.

Thats me

BTW, should not teachers have their salaries doubled for working in higher-risk environment?

kippy

Thats me wrote: »

BTW, should not teachers have their salaries doubled for working in higher-risk environment?

Do nurses?
Shop assistants?

meeeeh

JP100 wrote: »

The above is exactly why I repeatedly used 'identified' and 'known' when describing outbreaks in schools as it's quite clear there's alot of shenanigans going on around schools and to the health risk of all of our children, their extended families and all school staff. That is something I could never defend or stand over but it is something quite a number of posters in this thread are quite willing to do.

You mean public health followed the advice of a teacher and decided to test more kids than they first thought it was necessary. If that's masterminding the cover up I wouldn't worry about it because it was not very effective one.

And this is with the usual caveat that if it's on Twitter it obviously must be true.

Lillyfae

Thats me wrote: »

OK, please feel free to share your calculations. Lets compare how different they are.

I haven't made any calculations, you have! You took the figures I had posted from the Irish Times, completely misunderstood them, made a nonsensical calculation then doubled down and made another nonsensical calculation.

wirelessdude01

Smegging hell wrote: »

https://twitter.com/dlooney/status/1318940496975233027

Nothing to see. We only raise issues because we want school to close, not that we want to keep them open.

blanch152

Smegging hell wrote: »

https://twitter.com/dlooney/status/1318940496975233027

Quite obviously the teacher knew that the pods had not been implemented properly.

If they have been implemented properly, such situations shouldn't arise.

JP100

meeeeh wrote: »

You mean public health followed the advice of a teacher and decided to test more kids than they first thought it was necessary. If that's masterminding the cover up I wouldn't worry about it because it was not very effective one.

And this is with the usual caveat that if it's on Twitter it obviously must be true.

Teachers are effectively parents in absence and have a great duty of care to their students. That story if accurate shows a teacher who showed a great duty of care and a lot of compassion for their pupils and by extension their families and your immediate esponse is to belittle and slag off the teacher. Well done you.

JP100

blanch152 wrote: »

Quite obviously the teacher knew that the pods had not been implemented properly.

If they have been implemented properly, such situations shouldn't arise.

Everything you post in here acutely shows you have no clue whatsoever as to the realities and workings of school life.

Thats me

Lillyfae wrote: »

I haven't made any calculations, you have! You took the figures I had posted from the Irish Times, completely misunderstood them, made a nonsensical calculation then doubled down and made another nonsensical calculation.

What i not understood? You wrote it was taken some 12500 adults and children related to schools, tested and found 2.8% of them, surprise, are covid-positive.

Basing on this stats you have declared "That's not a huge rate of positivity"

I took nation-wide stats to show 2.8% is huge.

You corrected me that tests were collected for over 8 weeks, and i corrected my calculations as well to show 2.8% is still huge.

Tthan you started blaming that i'm wrong with no presenting any calculations to support your statement.

I do not see much sense in prolonging this discussion.

blanch152

JP100 wrote: »

Well yes, as we're also constantly told that schools are low risk, controlled environments in which the virus has less leeway to take hold. Latest figures suggest otherwise.

Eh, no they don't.

20% of our population are in schools most of the day.

Around 10% of outbreaks were in school. That means schools were lower risk than the community as they should have seen 20% of outbreaks if they were the same risk and a higher number if they were greater risk.

Those are the issues that arose with nursing homes and meat factories - they had higher rates of outbreaks than the community.

khalessi

blanch152 wrote: »

Quite obviously the teacher knew that the pods had not been implemented properly.

If they have been implemented properly, such situations shouldn't arise.

Non of the pods are implemented properly.

Teachers have been saying this since the documents were released, if you look at the documents sent out to schools, in some drawings there is 40cm between children on the plans, the tables are shoved up against radiators and to acheive 1metre social distancing between students they measured from nose to nose. Even professionally trained draughtsmen/architects couldn't get the kids to fit.

So it is not the teachers fault if pods dont work we have all followed guidelines issued by Dept of Ed.

The kids are close enough that there have been headlice outbreaks in schools.