Schools closed until February? (part 3)

JDD wrote: »

I know I know. But it would be good to know. The government sway with the views of the general populace, for the most part. If teachers are stating that they are putting their safety at risk, and are looking for for public backing for alternatives, it would certainly back up that statement if you could say X number of teachers have been hospitalised over the past month, and that is higher than other professions that are back working in their normal environment.

INTO asked for this and have been ridiculed over it. Consensus being who do they think they are.

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

INTO asked for this and have been ridiculed over it. Consensus being who do they think they are.

I haven't seen anyone giving out about these demand placed by the INTO. Can you point me to where people were saying this? It's one of the few points I agree with the INTO on, even if they were 2 months too late in demanding these.

JDD wrote: »

Of course, if there haven't been any hospitalisations, or less than say retail workers or delivery drivers, it probably won't be a useful statistic.

So, just to be clear, if it doesn't confirm what you want it wouldn't be a useful statistic?

JDD wrote: »

I know I know. But it would be good to know. The government sway with the views of the general populace, for the most part. If teachers are stating that they are putting their safety at risk, and are looking for for public backing for alternatives, it would certainly back up that statement if you could say X number of teachers have been hospitalised over the past month, and that is higher than other professions that are back working in their normal environment.

Of course, if there haven't been any hospitalisations, or less than say retail workers or delivery drivers, it probably won't be a useful statistic.

It would confirm that the risk for teachers is low or non existent, which would be useful to confirm that onsite education (in it's current form) is low risk and should continue

Lillyfae wrote: »

It would confirm that the risk for teachers is low or non existent, which would be useful to confirm that onsite education (in it's current form) is low risk and should continue

Just for the record I’ve two kids in primary school.
The question I have is where is the scientific evidence showing that c19 is spreading or not spreading in schools?

If it’s not spreading in a close contact environment with minimal ppe being worn (again primary schools here) is the answer:
A)proof that children under a certain age are not effective at spreading, if so school stays open teachers can work safely.
this virus does not spread in the general populace as much as thought, hence other business with less close contact can remain open ie non essential business

If it is spreading:
Steps need to be taken to put in place a hybrid education system that will allow class sizes to reduce drastically, by alternating groups of children to come into class on certain day (S) of the week, thus protecting teachers by reducing class sizes substantially.
Ppe for primary kids (Masks) can be looked at again.

tom1ie wrote: »

Just for the record I’ve two kids in primary school.
The question I have is where is the scientific evidence showing that c19 is spreading or not spreading in schools?

If it’s not spreading in a close contact environment with minimal ppe being worn (again primary schools here) is the answer:
A)proof that children under a certain age are not effective at spreading, if so school stays open teachers can work safely.
this virus does not spread in the general populace as much as thought, hence other business with less close contact can remain open ie non essential business

If it is spreading:
Steps need to be taken to put in place a hybrid education system that will allow class sizes to reduce drastically, by alternating groups of children to come into class on certain day (S) of the week, thus protecting teachers by reducing class sizes substantially.
Ppe for primary kids (Masks) can be looked at again.

Not sure why you're asking me, but according to the Irish Times today, 12,500 adults and children linked to over 500 schools and childcare facilities have so far been tested for Covid-19, with 352 positive cases recorded. That's not a huge rate of positivity, especially if the tracing criteria is narrow.

Thats me wrote: »

In relation to last 8 weeks time there is visible increase in the stats: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/

On this, I would argue that the increase has been exponential since somewhere around the middle of August.

Lillyfae wrote: »

today, 12,500 adults and children linked to over 500 schools and childcare facilities have so far been tested for Covid-19, with 352 positive cases recorded. That's not a huge rate of positivity

52256*100/1453608 = 3.59%

Not huge comparing to what?


Yesterday there was 1263 new cases in the country in total, which is 0.03% of population:

100*1263/4954498 = 0.025%

Please do not hesitate to correct me if i'm wrong.

Lillyfae wrote: »

How many were tested in order to get the 1263 positives? And can you get the numbers for the last 8 weeks of tested and positive cases?

13,299

This is easily all available online.

I see both Michael Martin and Stephen Donnelly have both said they weren't informed about the decision to get approximately 3000 people to conduct their own contact tracing.

Who gave the okay for it Paul Reid?

I don't get the change on the windows issue. Room gets very stuffy, very quickly with 25-35 breathing the same air

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

13,299

This is easily all available online.

Sorry, i feel low gugleability today, if you not mind could you please provide your analysys on how many of these tests were done on average asyptomatic people and how many on patients delivered to hospital because they already have developed COVID symptoms?

I think country-wide averages calculation based on active cases to population ratio is more correct.

Thats me wrote: »

52256*100/1453608 = 3.59%

Not huge comparing to what?


Yesterday there was 1263 new cases in the country in total, which is 0.03% of population:

100*1263/4954498 = 0.025%

Please do not hesitate to correct me if i'm wrong.

Those are two completely different statistics!!! Any comparison is completely meaningless!!!

Funsterdelux wrote: »

Anyone notice schools with the windows closed yesterday? Local primary had all that i could see closed.

I know it was a dirty aul day but it wasnt cold, with the wind the windows could still have been cracked open a bit.

This is the type of thing that can lead to superspreading like what happened in Isreal.

I emailed the school, got this reply

Thank you for your email.

On a daily basis teachers open and close windows, bathroom windows are open all day, classroom doors are open all day, all corridor doors including those leading to and from the stairways are open and the emergency exits are open in the morning, at break times and when the need arises.
All these ventilation measures ensure a good circulation of air throughout the school.

I hope this answers your question.

Not fully satisfied with that response, Id be concerned by the lack of cross ventilation during class, especially as they werent allowed out at break times because of the weather.

blanch152 wrote: »

Those are two completely different statistics!!! Any comparison is completely meaningless!!!

Why? In Lillyfae's example we taking average people from specific group and see how many of them have covid. In my example we taking all cases for one day coutrywide.

Even we will take all active cases, not only discovered yesterday - it is 27027 cases, 0.55% of whole population. Including cases related to schools, symptomatic ilness and tests done on asymptomatic general public.