Schools closed until February? (part 3)

irishblessing · 29-10-2020 10:20PM

combat14 wrote: »

‘Schools are safe. They are safer than being outside of schools’ – Taoiseach adamant classes will resume despite ASTI threat

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/schools-are-safe-they-are-safer-than-being-outside-of-schools-taoiseach-adamant-classes-will-resume-despite-asti-threat-39683194.html

What a load of disingenuous rubbish. These lines from Michael smacks of Trump style, overdramatic claims.

“So this is a very important national objective for the country, that we look after this generation of children, and that they don't become victims of this virus into the future.” - “Schools are safe. They are safer than being outside of the schools."

Oh PLEASE.

1. They may yet be real victims of coronavirus when they have permanent damage to their bodies or bring it home to someone who becomes seriously ill or worse.
2. There are rolling quarantines and closures already so if there's any damage to their future in terms of education its in the lack of his government's failure to implement a nationally supported framework of blended remote learning.
3. Schools are not safe. As we've all discussed here at length. It's also why the union is threatening strike and why there's a 117k member fb page formed because they don't feel safe with the lack of transparency in the data.

Tool.

And the best the article could come up with that the teachers union are looking for is just ventilation? The journalist seems to be deliberately trying to trivialise the real issues to the reader.

Mr Martin said there would also be additional supports allocated to schools before the end of the year, to ensure they can meet infrastructure requirements. :pac:

Just vague promises of more "engagement" to make things safer instead of actually doing something. I'm honestly so sick of this crap I feel like I just want to pull my kids and focus on them at home for a while and check out of this insane circus show.

Cluedo Monopoly · 29-10-2020 10:23PM

combat14 wrote: »

‘Schools are safe. They are safer than being outside of schools’ – Taoiseach adamant classes will resume despite ASTI threat

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/schools-are-safe-they-are-safer-than-being-outside-of-schools-taoiseach-adamant-classes-will-resume-despite-asti-threat-39683194.html

Yes and this government does not do U-turns

Purplewaters · 29-10-2020 10:32PM

irishblessing wrote: »

What a load of disingenuous rubbish. These lines from Michael smacks of Trump style, overdramatic claims.

“So this is a very important national objective for the country, that we look after this generation of children, and that they don't become victims of this virus into the future.” - “Schools are safe. They are safer than being outside of the schools."

Oh PLEASE.

1. They may yet be real victims of coronavirus when they have permanent damage to their bodies or bring it home to someone who becomes seriously ill or worse.
2. There are rolling quarantines and closures already so if there's any damage to their future in terms of education its in the lack of his government's failure to implement a nationally supported framework of blended remote learning.
3. Schools are not safe. As we've all discussed here at length. It's also why the union is threatening strike and why there's a 117k member fb page formed because they don't feel safe with the lack of transparency in the data.

Tool.

And the best the article could come up with that the teachers union are looking for is just ventilation? The journalist seems to be deliberately trying to trivialise the real issues to the reader.

Mr Martin said there would also be additional supports allocated to schools before the end of the year, to ensure they can meet infrastructure requirements. :pac:

Just vague promises of more "engagement" to make things safer instead of actually doing something. I'm honestly so sick of this crap I feel like I just want to pull my kids and focus on them at home for a while and check out of this insane circus show.

The safer than community bull**** is the worst part. At least acknowledge the tonnes of cases. They are also messing with the numbers. They compared overall community rates for symptomatic people and contacts to only the close contacts in schools, none of the index cases. The people asking the questions either don't really this or are ignoring this important difference. Nobody would ever believe schools are safer than the outside world, why??? Why would they be? We are not stupid but the government treat us as if we are.

Purplewaters · 29-10-2020 10:34PM

If education is so important then stop treating the public like idiots. Then again some people actually do believe all this crap about schools being safe.

Blondini · 29-10-2020 11:12PM

Purplewaters wrote: »

If education is so important then stop treating the public like idiots. Then again some people actually do believe all this crap about schools being safe.

Facts and statistics.

MelbourneMan · 29-10-2020 11:49PM

Purplewaters wrote: »

If education is so important then stop treating the public like idiots. Then again some people actually do believe all this crap about schools being safe.

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

History Queen · 29-10-2020 11:53PM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

Is there a reason you cannot or will not answer my question?

Icyseanfitz · 29-10-2020 11:57PM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

Schools are not safe, they currently have a transmission rate of 3%, and this is increasing week by week.

Blondini · 30-10-2020 12:09AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

What is happening here?

Are you the marquee man?

downthemiddle · 30-10-2020 12:16AM

Blondini wrote: »

What is happening here?

Are you the marquee man?

I think we need to update our Malware!!!!

downthemiddle · 30-10-2020 12:27AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

MelbourneMan wrote: »

I am an authority on this matter.

A lot of people are making the mistake of simplifying transmission to a single stage. To understand the various contributions of the various societal interractions for virus transmission, the household ones must effectively be excluded.

In practice, they cannot be stopped. Intrahoushold isolation is effectively impossible. And transmission must be understood as a two stage process - transmission outside the household, and then within it. Taken in isolation, any single external interface - pubs, worksplace, schools, shops, etc, have an ostensibly low transmission rate. Giving those who dont really understand what they are talking about, seemingly statisitical justification for their contention thant environment X is hardly at all contributing to the propagation. They state pubs arent, international travel isnt, schools arent, small crowds at sports fixtures arent, etc. But the reality is that they are. And why the non essential - unfortunately therefore the fun things in life - must be shutdown. Its mistaken to regard a single transmission in a sports club as insignificantly small in the overall view. But that single external transmission propagates to 2-6 cases in the home. Then just one of them in an external case of the workplace or visiting of another home. And so on

We cannot close down homes. The chain of transmission must be broken outside it.

You seem confused Mr Expert. In one thread you claim that schools are contributing to propagation yet in this thread you state that schools are safe and to claim otherwise is harmful. Clearly you regard your own behaviour as harmful.

Purplewaters · 30-10-2020 12:54AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

Haha this has given me a laugh. Didn't realise you were pretending to be in charge of this joke of a government.

30-10-2020 07:25AM

https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2020/1030/1174784-schools-coronavirus/

Yet here it is those who express what is quickly becoming the internationally accepted scientific view, that are painted as the contrarians on this thread

8k71ps · 30-10-2020 08:23AM

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2020/1030/1174784-schools-coronavirus/

Yet here it is those who express what is quickly becoming the internationally accepted scientific view, that are painted as the contrarians on this thread

I can say as a matter of fact that it absolutely isn't the consensus:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30502-6/fulltext https://www.imperial.ac.uk/medicine/research-and-impact/groups/react-study/(Y7-12 have much higher prevalence than other ages except uni cohort)
https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020/09/30/largest-covid-19-contact-tracing-study-date-finds-children-key-spread-evidence

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.5694/mja2.50823

Infact it seems to be swinging the other way, since it's really only know we have any proper information on transmission

JimmyVik · 30-10-2020 08:29AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

Lets say one child could infect a few more in their class or school.
And then those kids go home, asymptomatic to their homes every day.
Do you think there is then a chance that those asymptomatic kids could be infecting others ion their household, including vulnerable or older people they live with, who could go on to infect others in their jobs etc.

What are those outbreaks from asymptomatic kids who went home and spread it classed as? Would it be schools or would it be household?

See I know of a case where a covid positive child was in a classroom with 27 other people for 4.5 days while having what were thought to be cold symptoms. Every day 27 other potential virus carriers went home to their families from that class.

Thats 27 paths to potential household outbreaks which came from a child in a school.

Maybe Tony should comment on how the virus is getting into households.

Oh yeah, every one of them are having parties every night.

holdyerhorses · 30-10-2020 08:59AM

JimmyVik wrote: »

Lets say one child could infect a few more in their class or school.
And then those kids go home, asymptomatic to their homes every day.
Do you think there is then a chance that those asymptomatic kids could be infecting others ion their household, including vulnerable or older people they live with, who could go on to infect others in their jobs etc.

What are those outbreaks from asymptomatic kids who went home and spread it classed as? Would it be schools or would it be household?

See I know of a case where a covid positive child was in a classroom with 27 other people for 4.5 days while having what were thought to be cold symptoms. Every day 27 other potential virus carriers went home to their families from that class.

Thats 27 paths to potential household outbreaks which came from a child in a school.

Maybe Tony should comment on how the virus is getting into households.

Oh yeah, every one of them are having parties every night.

I feel this is staring the obvious, and that as a nation we have decided to prioritise children's education over many other things deemed non-essential, in the balance of risk/reward we have accepted the limited transmission that may be caused through schools and are moving on, or am I wrong?

MelbourneMan · 30-10-2020 09:00AM

downthemiddle wrote: »

You seem confused Mr Expert. In one thread you claim that schools are contributing to propagation yet in this thread you state that schools are safe and to claim otherwise is harmful. Clearly you regard your own behaviour as harmful.

Hello and thanks for your question. My schedule is very busy today, but I shall be happy to clear up this apparant contradiction for you later this afternoon.

wirelessdude01 · 30-10-2020 09:01AM

JimmyVik wrote: »

Lets say one child could infect a few more in their class or school.
And then those kids go home, asymptomatic to their homes every day.
Do you think there is then a chance that those asymptomatic kids could be infecting others ion their household, including vulnerable or older people they live with, who could go on to infect others in their jobs etc.

What are those outbreaks from asymptomatic kids who went home and spread it classed as? Would it be schools or would it be household?

See I know of a case where a covid positive child was in a classroom with 27 other people for 4.5 days while having what were thought to be cold symptoms. Every day 27 other potential virus carriers went home to their families from that class.

Thats 27 paths to potential household outbreaks which came from a child in a school.

Maybe Tony should comment on how the virus is getting into households.

Oh yeah, every one of them are having parties every night.

Don't forget about the doorbells, please god think of the doorbells in all of this.

Given such prominence by the lips of Leo and then to be ignored by actual medical people.

JimmyVik · 30-10-2020 09:02AM

holdyerhorses wrote: »

I feel this is staring the obvious, and that as a nation we have decided to prioritise children's education over many other things deemed non-essential, in the balance of risk/reward we have accepted the limited transmission that may be caused through schools and are moving on, or am I wrong?

I believe its not as limited as they say. But nphet and the government have accepted it alright.

MelbourneMan · 30-10-2020 09:02AM

History Queen wrote: »

Is there a reason you cannot or will not answer my question?

Hello. I would like to do that. I do not get to read all posts here. More of a quick scan to be help with the various questions that arise. Could you please quote the relevant question? Thank you.

mirrorwall14 · 30-10-2020 09:03AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello Purplewaters, I am able to take your question, and can elucidate on your opening comment.

The impression you have of the public being treated like idiots, is, I can say, mistaken. We are dealing with a complex issue in this crisis, and it requires very specific and expert knowledge. The wider public cannot be expected to analyse the situation, options, and best actions, and so, are guided, through the governments executive, by people who have truly devoted themselves in their professional lives to being capable of guiding the nation.
Your question is itself, ill posed, with the assumption that schools being safe, being, as you colourfully put it, c**p, being inaccurate. In fact, schools are safe, and it is the suggestion being put about (harmfully in the view of many recognising the error in the message) that it is not, that is without foundation.

Are you actually pretending to be the government? Or worse still actually are?

Because as a response to a poster talking about the perception that the public are being treated as idiots... well your response is just that and only serves to amplify the perception. It is incredibly condescending

downthemiddle · 30-10-2020 09:04AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello and thanks for your question. My schedule is very busy today, but I shall be happy to clear up this apparant contradiction for you later this afternoon.

There was no question.

JimmyVik · 30-10-2020 09:08AM

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Are you actually pretending to be the government? Or worse still actually are?

Because as a response to a poster talking about the perception that the public are being treated as idiots... well your response is just that and only serves to amplify the perception. It is incredibly condescending

Thread is full of shills and trolls.
Dont even bother.

30-10-2020 09:11AM

8k71ps wrote: »

I can say as a matter of fact that it absolutely isn't the consensus:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30502-6/fulltext https://www.imperial.ac.uk/medicine/research-and-impact/groups/react-study/(Y7-12 have much higher prevalence than other ages except uni cohort)
https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020/09/30/largest-covid-19-contact-tracing-study-date-finds-children-key-spread-evidence

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.5694/mja2.50823

Infact it seems to be swinging the other way, since it's really only know we have any proper information on transmission

I never used the word consensus, however seen as you provided 3 article, first one is a study on Rhinovirus, a virus known to be resistant to hand washing and similar actions due to its structure, the second is a study based on India, not representative of experience in European schools, unlike the German and Norwegian studies, and the third makes the conclusion that Schools are clearly neither inherently safe nor unsafe. The risk associated with these settings depends on the level of community transmission. What have I been saying?

History Queen · 30-10-2020 09:14AM

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello. I would like to do that. I do not get to read all posts here. More of a quick scan to be help with the various questions that arise. Could you please quote the relevant question? Thank you.

I'll play along.

Obviously your time is much more valuable than mine....

Essentially I want to know what is the prevailing opinion in the Department of Education about their own repeated ineptitude? A clear answer devoid of excuses and bull**** would be fantastic.

holdyerhorses · 30-10-2020 09:18AM

JimmyVik wrote: »

I believe its not as limited as they say. But nphet and the government have accepted it alright.

What next, then? If we agree removing children from education for 12months+ is not something we want to do as a society, and we agree safety measures in schools are about as good as they can get (asti demands not withstanding) then we accept that we need to live with the transmission caused from schools and move on.

Blondini · 30-10-2020 09:34AM

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/education/2020/1030/1174784-schools-coronavirus/

Yet here it is those who express what is quickly becoming the internationally accepted scientific view, that are painted as the contrarians on this thread

Obsessing about schools at 6 in the morning man?

I think we all get your opinion at this stage.
You think schools are not a major problem, despite many teachers here who live the experience, saying otherwise.

Let it go.

8k71ps · 30-10-2020 09:45AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I never used the word consensus, however seen as you provided 3 article, first one is a study on Rhinovirus, a virus known to be resistant to hand washing and similar actions due to its structure, the second is a study based on India, not representative of experience in European schools, unlike the German and Norwegian studies, and the third makes the conclusion that Schools are clearly neither inherently safe nor unsafe. The risk associated with these settings depends on the level of community transmission. What have I been saying?

I sent 4 and you clearly didn't actually read any of them. Schools are part of community transmission, and unless you can provide why the rates are different.Firstly we have much larger class sizes than either France or Germany, so the position that somehow we are similar to those countries is moot. Secondly, in the countries that are more similar to us in class sizing and funding we see for instance https://www.timesofisrael.com/health-ministry-report-finds-kids-more-likely-to-catch-virus-than-adults/ which shows our statistics to be fundamentally flawed, showing that schools play a large part in generating community transmission. Thirdly those studies ,as well as the one shown in nature, which I assume you know about, are fundamentally flawed and contingent on students having the same symptoms, which isn't true. There was a study in South Korea for instance that indicated that the vast majority of asymptomatic spread originates in children and young adults, with even in symptomatic cases showing different symptoms. For another example , the study in nature uses the Irish governments statistics from march, ie that there was absolutely no school transmission in march which is a bold faced lie, which is true of many other countries in Europe (there are Facebook groups in most of Western Europe that are indicating that the official statistics are wrong).

There is also lots of new papers being published for example https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.18.20197400v4?fbclid=IwAR3mb0vSt-fcEouxQL-97MtLdTY3787j0YA2GiPBWNUtc0egomH1gBe_e5s that are showing the science is rapidly changing and it's clearly turning towards outright closure or large amounts of funding in mitigation.

Also for the most part the response in Ireland has been highly selective of the science they do take on board vs don't. For instance, we really should be testing every single student in the room with covid due to our knowledge of aerosolic spread and we don't, we should be demanding masks be worn on all children aged 6 and above and we don't, we should be creating a national system for remote learning in order to stop the closed schools from falling behind and we don't. It is completely ridiculous on the one hand to be sourcing a set of papers that ""prove"" that schools are safe (which they don't) but then also not to heed there advice elsewhere. With the state of our contact tracing and testing there is both no way to tell the safety of school and no way to actually make them safe.

8k71ps · 30-10-2020 09:49AM

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

Can I ask what is everyone’s opinion on letting a secondary school student go back to a school after the weekend where a covid case has been diagnosed. The case is not in the students year so they are expected to be present at school. What would you do if it was your decision to make?

I would let them go if that class had been sent home. Considering the lack of any investment in online learning its not worth it. However I would note that our testing is a complete shambles and that if I heard about any further cases I'd pull them out and get them tested immediately.

mirrorwall14 · 30-10-2020 09:50AM

JimmyVik wrote: »

Thread is full of shills and trolls.
Dont even bother.

I don’t post anymore because of that but this one is ridiculous

Schools closed until February? (part 3)

Comments