Schools closed until February? (part 3)

teachinggal123 · 02-11-2020 2:47pm

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.

02-11-2020 2:51pm

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.

You do realise that this dropped to 6.5% as recently as 10th October. Eg. when schools were still open and the country had not gone to level 3, the proportion of cases in school age kids dropped significantly. When we went to level 3, this started rising as the rest of society was severely curtailed.

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 2:55pm

Deleted User wrote:

You do realise that this dropped to 6.5% as recently as 10th October. Eg. when schools were still open and the country had not gone to level 3, the proportion of cases in school age kids dropped significantly. When we went to level 3, this started rising as the rest of society was severely curtailed.

Have you a link to that?

02-11-2020 3:01pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Have you a link to that?

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-1914-dayepidemiologyreports/october2020/

What is interesting is that even though the proportion of cases in 5-14 year olds is rising, the actual number of cases in this age group is now also falling, just later and slower than in other age groups. This is what you would expect given they have been in school. I would expect to see this drop accelerate due to the midterm effect, before levelling off next week as the return to school starts kicks in. Due to the lower level of community cases however I dont expect a bounce

MerlinSouthDub · 02-11-2020 3:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-1914-dayepidemiologyreports/october2020/

What is interesting is that even though the proportion of cases in 5-14 year olds is rising, the actual number of cases in this age group is now also falling, just later and slower than in other age groups. This is what you would expect given they have been in school. I would expect to see this drop accelerate due to the midterm effect, before levelling off next week as the return to school starts kicks in. Due to the lower level of community cases however I dont expect a bounce

The pattern of infection rates over time suggests that parents infecting children has been a bigger issue than vice versa. i.e. higher infection rates in adults first, then after a delay infection rates in children rose. If children were infecting adults, you would expect the pattern to be the other way around.

Boggles · 02-11-2020 3:19pm

Deleted User wrote: »

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

You are forgetting to include the bit at the end.

*These outbreaks are outbreaks associated with school children +/or school staff. Transmission of COVID-19
within the school has not necessarily been established in these outbreaks.

Oddly I don't see an asterix beside any of the other 24 locations. They must be fair sure about them.

History Queen · 02-11-2020 3:29pm

Clarity around definition of close contacts in schools according to this article, maybe I'm being dense but is it any different to what a close contact has been deemed to be since September?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40074659.html?type=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&__twitter_impression=true

Boggles · 02-11-2020 3:31pm

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

The pattern of infection rates over time suggests that parents infecting children has been a bigger issue than vice versa. i.e. higher infection rates in adults first, then after a delay infection rates in children rose. If children were infecting adults, you would expect the pattern to be the other way around.

Adults are far more likely to be tested than children.

The vast majority of adults do not work in schools, so their criteria for being deemed a close content is far more stringent.

Again we don't know what the bar is in schools, no one has clarified.

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 3:33pm

History Queen wrote: »

Clarity around definition of close contacts in schools according to this article, maybe I'm being dense but is it any different to what a close contact has been deemed to be since September?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40074659.html?type=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&__twitter_impression=true

Still terms and conditions apply to that.

Little or no change at first glance.

MerlinSouthDub · 02-11-2020 3:34pm

Boggles wrote: »

Adults are far more likely to be tested than children.

The vast majority of adults do not work in schools, so their criteria for being deemed a close content is far more stringent.

Again we don't know what the bar is in schools, no one has clarified.

None of the above is relevant to my point, which was about the pattern of changes in infection rates.

Boggles · 02-11-2020 3:36pm

History Queen wrote: »

Clarity around definition of close contacts in schools according to this article, maybe I'm being dense but is it any different to what a close contact has been deemed to be since September?

No, not as far as I can tell.

The bit of about "ventilation" being a mitigating factor in determining a close contact is truly bizarre.

How does public health officials gauge ventilation of a unique setting they haven't been to, over the phone, even if they did go there what level of expertise have they to determine adequate ventilation?

Or is it what I suspect on the lamented check list:

Is there Windows in the room?

Boggles · 02-11-2020 3:36pm

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

None of the above is relevant to my point, which was about the pattern of changes in infection rates.

Testing has nothing to with infection rates?

Really?

JimmyVik · 02-11-2020 3:41pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Unfortunately, with hundreds of cases per day, the level of detail you are looking for is virtually impossible to complete without an individual investigator assigned to each case. And this is where the facebook group has emerged to fill a vacuum. They would understandably like to know this detail, but is it best use of resources? I have no doubt the vast majority who engage in the facebook group are well intentioned and honest in what they share. It does however take a notification of a case in a classroom as evidence of an outbreak in the school. Its not the same thing

Now thats the best excuse yet

Blondini · 02-11-2020 3:56pm

Boggles wrote: »

You are forgetting to include the bit at the end.

Oddly I don't see an asterix beside any of the other 24 locations. They must be fair sure about them.

I've said it before, that simple asterisk betrays a lot. Special highlighting of schools for no apparent reason suggests that the lady doth protest waaayyyyy too much.

Boggles · 02-11-2020 3:59pm

Blondini wrote: »

I've said it before, that simple asterisk betrays a lot. Special highlighting of schools for no apparent reason suggests that the lady doth protest waaayyyyy too much.

Some amount of kids being home schooled too.

02-11-2020 4:11pm

JimmyVik wrote: »

Now thats the best excuse yet

Where's the excuse?

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 4:11pm

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 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.

Here you go.

CDC study finds kids do pass on the virus.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6944e1.htm?s_cid=mm6944e1_w

Theboinkmaster · 02-11-2020 4:13pm

Boggles wrote: »

Some amount of kids being home schooled too.

How many? fvck all I'd say

Lillyfae · 02-11-2020 4:15pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Here you go.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6944e1.htm?s_cid=mm6944e1_w

The whole study is in the context of household transmission.

khalessi · 02-11-2020 4:16pm

History Queen wrote: »

Clarity around definition of close contacts in schools according to this article, maybe I'm being dense but is it any different to what a close contact has been deemed to be since September?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40074659.html?type=amp&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&__twitter_impression=true

Looks like the usual, if you have windows and a mask etc. these will be considered mitigating circumstances and it will be decided by public health who have already stated that They (being parents and teachers) are right about different rules applying. Dr Collins freely acknowledged on Thursday that public health officials are being deliberately conservative when it comes to who is deemed a close contact in a school setting. https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1031/1175008-schools-covid/

While Dr. Marie Casey tweeted, "being designated a close contact means no school, and that has immediate childcare consequences. It can mean cancelling elective healthcare and means not being able to visit certain settings like nursing homes", and went on to say, "But if a child is excluded and their parents have to work, where are they cared for? There isn't anywhere for them to go currently, not good to send them to elderly parents and there is notenough childcare provision out there to cover (which wouldn't be lower risk than school)".:rolleyes:

So basically no change teachers will not be tested as babysitters are needed.

Now I realise that schools have a low risk but all the same cases appear, I have seen that in my own school and have experienced not being considered a close contact but who babysits my child is up to me not a government representative.

eagle eye · 02-11-2020 4:17pm

Lillyfae wrote: »

The whole study is in the context of household transmission.

Your point?

02-11-2020 4:19pm

eagle eye wrote: »

Here you go.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6944e1.htm?s_cid=mm6944e1_w

Thank you, now can you please point to the poster who said transmission does not or cannot occur within kids. Its also a study of household transmission and uses the word household 81 times and school zero, and below are the conclusions of the report.

What is added by this report?

Findings from a prospective household study with intensive daily observation for ≥7 consecutive days indicate that transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among household members was frequent from either children or adults.

What are the implications for public health practice?

Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is common and occurs early after illness onset. Persons should self-isolate immediately at the onset of COVID-like symptoms, at the time of testing as a result of a high risk exposure, or at time of a positive test result, whichever comes first. All household members, including the index case, should wear masks within shared spaces in the household.

I sometimes wonder do those posting reports to support thier viewpoint actually read them.

Equally, did anyone bother to read these:

https://www.theweek.co.uk/108447/sch...onavirus-study

https://www.fhi.no/nyheter/2020/lite...hage-og-skole/

http://ftp.iza.org/dp13790

khalessi · 02-11-2020 4:25pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Thank you, now can you please point to the poster who said transmission does not or cannot occur within kids. Its also a study of household transmission and uses the word household 81 times and school zero, and below are the conclusions of the report.

I sometimes wonder do those posting reports to support thier viewpoint actually read them.

Equally, did anyone bother to read these:

https://www.theweek.co.uk/108447/sch...onavirus-study

https://www.fhi.no/nyheter/2020/lite...hage-og-skole/

http://ftp.iza.org/dp13790

THe first two links coming up as page not found. Third link works

Boggles · 02-11-2020 4:26pm

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

How many? fvck all I'd say

1000+ children test positive with the virus a week, virtually none being linked back to schools.

You tell me.

02-11-2020 4:35pm

khalessi wrote: »

THe first two links coming up as page not found. Third link works

Try this for the first which is basically a summary of the norwegian and german studies

https://www.theweek.co.uk/108447/schools-do-not-spread-coronavirus-study

The norwegian one is here.
https://www.fhi.no/nyheter/2020/lite-smitte-i-barnehage-og-skole/
The summary is in Norwegian, but you can google translate. I would hope to find a more detailed version of this study

khalessi · 02-11-2020 4:38pm

Thank you, will give it a read as heading to car. I know there was an article afew months ago about Norway's biggest school having school transmitted cases making the scietists rethink their views so would be be interesting to read the study and see if the change why the change.

Here is that article
https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/BR569e/ny-rapport-norges-stoerste-skoleutbrudd-kan-tyde-paa-at-barn-smitter-me

BeamMeAway · 02-11-2020 4:38pm

Hey everyone. I have been racking myself up about this for the past week or so, lol. Trying to figure out if they will close down the schools. Do you think they will?

02-11-2020 4:45pm

WHO must be ran by Jim Corr also

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/risk-comms-updates/update39-covid-and-schools.pdf?sfvrsn=320db233_2

There were few outbreaks reported in schools since early 2020
Ø Studies were limited during school closures and other stay at home
measures. We are learning more as schools re-open
Ø In most infections or COVID-19 cases reported in children, infection was
acquired at home

• In school outbreaks, it was more likely that virus was introduced by adult
personnel

Schools being open did not lead to rise in community spread
Early modelling studies suggested that closing schools reduced community
transmission less than other social distancing interventions

Children and schools are unlikely to be the main drivers of COVID-19 transmission,

• Closure of schools should be considered only if there is no other alternative

Community transmission is reflected in the school setting
Ø Public health measures in the community are essential to protect schools from amplifying transmission

wirelessdude01 · 02-11-2020 5:12pm

The much lauded phone line for principals to call is only open from 8:00 to 4:30 Monday to Friday.

The one saving grace is that at least it is open 10:00 to 4:30 on weekends. That's some recognition that school Covid isn't just a school day thing.

Yes folks, Covid in schools isn't an issue outside of those hours.

vid36 · 02-11-2020 5:24pm

Individual NPIs, including school closure, workplace closure, public events ban, ban on gatherings of more than ten people, requirements to stay at home, and internal movement limits, are associated with reduced transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30785-4/fulltext

Schools closed until February? (part 3)

Comments