Schools closed until February? (part 3)

Boggles · 02-11-2020 01:11PM

meeeeh wrote: »

There is a difference between no and limited transmission.

I know, the difference is 1 maybe 2 in a million+.

In reality based on the "data" you have basically the same chance (give or take minute fractions) of picking up Covid in a school now than you had last year when Covid didn't exist.

Isn't that amazing?

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 01:11PM

I find it amazing, well I don't actually, that none of those fully in favour of schools being open made any comment as regards the CDC's findings in their study. It was posted in this thread.
Amazing how people with agendas just ignore anything that doesn't suit them.

Boggles · 02-11-2020 01:14PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The last report listed 46 outbreaks in schools in the previous week (17th to 23rd). Next report will be out Wednesday. I dont care what some official or other told the unions

It was Health Protection Surveillance Centre.

But you said....

Deleted User wrote: »

Everyone knows data integrity standards are higher in anonymous facebook groups than the HSPC

You have undermined the integrity of both in space of a couple of posts, which is pretty impressive.

So who do I believe, now?

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 01:15PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The last report listed 46 outbreaks in schools in the previous week (17th to 23rd). Next report will be out Wednesday. I dont care what some official or other told the unions

See the disparity between what is being said. Left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 01:17PM

Boggles wrote: »

It was Health Protection Surveillance Centre.

But you said....

You have undermined the integrity of both in space of a couple of posts, which is pretty impressive.

So who do I believe, now?

Maybe Jim Corr actually is a reliable source of news after all.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 01:18PM

Boggles wrote: »

I know, the difference is 1 maybe 2 in a million+.

In reality based on the "data" you have basically the same chance (give or take minute fractions) of picking up Covid in a school now than you had last year when Covid didn't exist.

Isn't that amazing?

I don't know what data are you talking about so I can't comment but considering proportion of infections for school going age groups didn't really increase since schools opened I would say effect isn't significant in Ireland.

Theboinkmaster · 02-11-2020 01:18PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I'd advise you to firstly contact the school and tell them that due to concerns for the health of your family that you want to keep your children at home.
Ask them if they can guarantee that your children will not contract covid-19 at school and bring it home because they cannot.
I've kept mine at home all along.
I contacted the school, Tusla, Dept. of education, the office of the Taoiseach, FF and FG and local TDs. FF, FG, deot. of the Taoiseach and the department ofveducation just send you around in circles.
I've had a local TD back in contact recently because I predicted figures correctly for early and mid October. He wasn't much help initially either.

Anyways I contacted Tusla because they'll be contacting you when your kid's miss a month. It's good to be able to reference that you were in contact with them early on. Just make it clear to them that this is a temporary measure up until you deem it safe for your kid's to return to school.
I'm being given all the schoolwork and homework by the school.

so you're going to keep your kids at home for the next 2 years, until they get a vaccine?!

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 01:21PM

Theboinkmaster wrote:

so you're going to keep your kids at home for the next 2 years, until they get a vaccine?!

I'm keeping them at home until I feel it's safe for them to return. This relates to covid-19 only.

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 01:27PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't know what data are you talking about so I can't comment but considering proportion of infections for school going age groups didn't really increase since schools opened I would say effect isn't significant in Ireland.

You do realise that for the two weeks before schools returned that the 5-14 range accounted for 8.5% of cases. Two weeks up to yesterday it had risen to 10.65%. That's a 25% increase.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 01:43PM

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

You do realise that for the two weeks before schools returned that the 5-14 range accounted for 8.5% of cases. Two weeks up to yesterday it had risen to 10.65%. That's a 25% increase.

In other words very little when you look at actual numbers or about 21 extra kids if there are 1000 new cases per day.

Theboinkmaster · 02-11-2020 01:43PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm keeping them at home until I feel it's safe for them to return. This relates to covid-19 only.

and what criteria do you require for it to be "safe"?

Are your children vaccinated under the usual HSE recommendations?

Theboinkmaster · 02-11-2020 01:44PM

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

You do realise that for the two weeks before schools returned that the 5-14 range accounted for 8.5% of cases. Two weeks up to yesterday it had risen to 10.65%. That's a 25% increase.

10.65% of cases? I can live with that figure.

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 01:53PM

meeeeh wrote: »

In other words very little when you look at actual numbers or about 21 extra kids if there are 1000 new cases per day.

Point being that thr percentage is increasing. You really don't like when the data doesn't back you up do you?

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 02:03PM

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Point being that thr percentage is increasing. You really don't like when the data doesn't back you up do you?

I said it didn't significantly increase not that it didn't increase and considering demand among school going children for testing increased after schools reopened that's not surprising.

Would be possible for you to reply to me without personal attack every time. You don't need to stop completely but I will take an odd post without personal attack. Do I really bother you that much?

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 02:06PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I said it didn't significantly increase not that it didn't increase and considering demand among school going children for testing increased after schools reopened that's not surprising.

Would be possible for you to reply to me without personal attack every time. You don't need to stop completely but I will take an odd post without personal attack. Do I really bother you that much?

Where is the personal attack? I stated percentage figures that you just don't like. Maybe take your ire out in them rather than makey uppy claims of personal attacks.

I'm sure if here is an issue a mod will drop me a message.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 02:09PM

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Where is the personal attack? I stated percentage figures that you just don't like. Maybe take your ire out in them rather than makey uppy claims of personal attacks.

I'm sure if here is an issue a mod will drop me a message.

So no.

khalessi · 02-11-2020 02:09PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I find it amazing, well I don't actually, that none of those fully in favour of schools being open made any comment as regards the CDC's findings in their study. It was posted in this thread.
Amazing how people with agendas just ignore anything that doesn't suit them.

It probably wasnt seen, it happens. I posted some links the other day about the public health official who admitted teachers and parents were right last week, that different rules apply to identifying close contacts in school. Another public health consultant in a different conversation mentioned that it had to do with who would mind the children if they were identified as a close contact as parents have to work?

No one batted an eyelid.

If you would like to post the link again, that would be great.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 02:10PM

khalessi wrote: »

It probably wasnt seen, it happens. I posted some links the other day about the public health official who admitted teachers and parents were right last week, that different rules apply to identifying close contacts in school. Another public health consultant then said that it had to do with who would mind the children if they were identified as a close contact as parents have to work?

No one batted an eyelid.

If you would like to post the link again, that would be great.

I don't find anything objectionable about that twit.

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 02:12PM

Theboinkmaster wrote:

and what criteria do you require for it to be "safe"?

I want definitive proof that it's safe.

Theboinkmaster wrote:

Are your children vaccinated under the usual HSE recommendations?

None of your business.
All I'm willing to tell you is that I'm not an anti-vaxxer.

02-11-2020 02:13PM

Boggles wrote: »

It was Health Protection Surveillance Centre.

But you said....

You have undermined the integrity of both in space of a couple of posts, which is pretty impressive.

So who do I believe, now?

Can you send on the link to this statement by the HSPC.

The official publication is below:
https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-19outbreaksclustersinireland/COVID-19%20Weekly%20Outbreak%20Highlights_Week412020_web%20version_v1.0_13102020.pdf

Edit: Presume this is the report Boggles refers to - anyone see the full document?
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/covid-19-transmitted-in-fewer-than-10-schools-nphet-1.4392706

khalessi · 02-11-2020 02:14PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't find anything objectionable about that statement.

Well on one level grand, I understand where they are coming from.but they are not considering teachers or children sitting beside covid +ve children as close contacts beacuse of babysitting concerns, so they would rather have an undiagnosed child in class with covid. I would guess they are hoping kids will be negative, but after hearing about the class which all got tested at teacher's insistence and 7 asymptomatic children with covid wre discovered it is an interesting gamble.

Also since when is the babysitting arrangements of people, the public health's business and who will mind my kids if I catch something (small risk I know)?

Theboinkmaster · 02-11-2020 02:20PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I want definitive proof that it's safe.

None of your business.
All I'm willing to tell you is that I'm not an anti-vaxxer.

So no then, of course you're a tinfoil wearing anti vaxxer.

Definitive proof will never come, nothing is definitive/100%.

Good luck with your home schooling. I'm sure your children will end up smart, well educated, happy and socially well adjusted little angles.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 02:20PM

khalessi wrote: »

Well on one level grand, I understand where they are coming from.but they are not considering teachers or children sitting beside covid +ve children as close contacts beacuse of babysitting concerns, so they would rather have an undiagnosed child in class with covid. I would guess they are hoping kids will be negative, but after hearing about the class which all got tested at teacher's insistence and 7 asymptomatic children with covid wre discovered it is an interesting gamble.

Also since when is the babysitting arrangements of people, the public health's business and who will mind my kids if I catch something (small risk I know)?

It's actually the low positivity rate among tested kids. If so few results come positive back for children is there really any point in widening testing criteria and automatically sending whole class home for two weeks.

As for that class the kids were tested so whoever spoke to the teacher must have agreed there is the need to test all the class. I disagree we should use the same rule for every situation, best practice in my opinion would be to individually asses situation.

As for who will mind our kids if we catch something well I guess we all have to deal with that question.

teachinggal123 · 02-11-2020 02:21PM

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Where is the personal attack? I stated percentage figures that you just don't like. Maybe take your ire out in them rather than makey uppy claims of personal attacks.

I'm sure if here is an issue a mod will drop me a message.

How many cards and warnings have you already had in this thread for personal attacks?

I seem to remember you got a yellow card last night.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 02:24PM

teachinggal123 wrote: »

How many cards and warnings have you already had in this thread for personal attacks?

I seem to remember you got a yellow card last night.

In fairness it is fairly mild stuff I just find it entertaining how it seems to appear in every post. However I think he might be a bit rattled the last few days.

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 02:25PM

meeeeh wrote: »

In fairness it is fairly mild stuff I just find it entertaining how it seems to appear in every post. However I think he might be a bit rattled the last few days.

How so?

khalessi · 02-11-2020 02:26PM

meeeeh wrote: »

It's actually the low positivity rate among tested kids. If so few results come positive back for children is there really any point in widening testing criteria and automatically sending whole class home for two weeks.

As for that class the kids were tested so whoever spoke to the teacher must have agreed there is the need to test all the class. I disagree we should use the same rule for every situation, best practice in my opinion would be to individually asses situation.

As for who will mind our kids if we catch something well I guess we all have to deal with that question.

Agreed, as I said a small chance, and yes, if we catch something well I guess we all have to deal with that question, but schools it seems are the only place that they are being conservative in identifying close contacts.

meeeeh · 02-11-2020 02:31PM

khalessi wrote: »

Agreed, as I said a small chance, and yes, if we catch something well I guess we all have to deal with that question, but schools it seems are the only place that they are being conservative in identifying close contacts.

I actually think speed is much more of an issue then how wide the net is. It's speed that needs to improve first. 3% or whatever positivity rate it is not much but that can make a lot of damage if health teams don't move fast enough. Fast turnaround will improve school safety much more than widening close contacts.

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 02:41PM

Theboinkmaster wrote:

So no then, of course you're a tinfoil wearing anti vaxxer.

I just told you I'm not an anti-vaxxer.

teachinggal123 · 02-11-2020 02:47PM

meeeeh wrote: »

In fairness it is fairly mild stuff I just find it entertaining how it seems to appear in every post. However I think he might be a bit rattled the last few days.

It is mild and easy to shake off alright. It just looks bad and undermines the points he is making.

Also, I do understand that us teachers on this thread are worried and working in very difficult circumstance and thus under significant pressure. This could be seen clearly last night when we were facing back into the classroom again today after mid-term. Passions were bound to be very high and that is understandable.

Schools closed until February? (part 3)

Comments