Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

Schools closed until February? (part 3)

1159160162164165323

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 639 ✭✭✭Thats me


    meeeeh wrote: »
    You are comparing peaches with apples


    Lol, if listen to you then everybody in this thread are comparing incomparable :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,570 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Why are they different time scales?

    It was a question.
    Boggles wrote: »
    with 2 different time scales?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,889 ✭✭✭the kelt


    Lillyfae wrote: »
    Unless the principal is reporting everything back to him every single day, which seems unlikely, he knows little more than gossip. He doesn't know what things are like "on the ground", because he hasn't actually been there during all this.

    Some here seem to think there is some grand scheme to wipe out teachers with Covid-19. There's no end to the fear mongering, all punctuated with "Where did I say that I want the schools to close?". Recycling studies from 6 months ago, from third world countries rife with malnutrition and limited access to potable water in order to prove some kind of point that children are harbingers of virus- to what result?

    If the number of teachers who have contracted this since September is 666 that is a very low number. If that number actually goes back to March, that is outstanding. I'm delighted that your risk has been minimized by your own hard work.

    Where did you get the number 666 from?

    And how does that number if remotely accurate become outstanding if you go back to March?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,218 ✭✭✭khalessi


    the kelt wrote: »
    Where did you get the number 666 from?

    And how does that number if remotely accurate become outstanding if you go back to March?

    i put up a tweet this morning with it


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    Boggles wrote: »
    It's a nonsense stat that tells us noting.

    Plumbers are .25% the national average.

    Teachers are 4 times more likely than plumbers to contract Covid.

    That's nonsense as well by the way.

    https://www.independent.ie/world-news/coronavirus/revealed-health-staff-teachers-and-students-the-breakdown-of-covid-cases-in-ireland-39833650.html

    The 666 number comes from information published in the Independent yesterday.

    Your stat regarding plumbers would be perfectly acceptable if plumbers make up 0.25% of the population. In that case you would say that plumbers are no more or less likely to catch coronavirus than anyone else.

    Of course you could say that the 666 number does not reflect the true number of teachers infected by the virus. Maybe teachers don't want to state their profession when they go to get a test. Maybe there are more asymptomatic teachers than there are in other professions, so they don't get tested. Maybe the HSE have out and out lied to Irish Independent in order to suppress the true number. I can't see any of those scenarios actually being realistic, but I would accept them as valid arguments.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Boggles wrote: »
    It's a nonsense stat that tells us noting.

    Plumbers are .25% the national average.

    Teachers are 4 times more likely than plumbers to contract Covid.

    That's nonsense as well by the way.

    It tells us teachers are less likely to have caught covid than the national average. Now it doesn't tell us why, or how it compares to other groups, but it does suggest being locked in classrooms with dozens of disease ridden snotballs has not had a massive impact on the risk they have faced compared to the average person


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,218 ✭✭✭khalessi


    It tells us teachers are less likely to have caught covid than the national average. Now it doesn't tell us why, or how it compares to other groups, but it does suggest being locked in classrooms with dozens of disease ridden snotballs has not had a massive impact on the risk they have faced compared to the average person

    I dont know who you are dealing with daily but I dont refer to my students as "disease ridden snotballs" so please don't.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,570 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    It tells us teachers are less likely to have caught covid than the national average.

    Which doesn't really tell us much.

    Again it depends on the variables. If you are going to list by profession you have to compare with profession.

    If it is since schools open, that is 7+ teachers a day getting infected.

    That on the face of it looks like a problem, but if 9 plumbers on average get infected a day not so much.

    What I have learned this week, is teachers in Russia have been classed the same as health care workers when it comes to priority vaccine roll out.

    Maybe they have data to back that up. Who knows.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    Boggles wrote: »
    Which doesn't really tell us much.

    Again it depends on the variables. If you are going to list by profession you have to compare with profession.

    If it is since schools open, that is 7+ teachers a day getting infected.

    It is since the first infection in March.

    It's very difficult to find a comparable profession: i.e. an industry where the employees did not attend work between March and September, and from that date attended work where social distancing was not possible. There is no comparable profession.

    The closest you might get is food factory workers - i.e. working in an indoor environment in close quarters with other people, albeit with masks and PPE in the part of the factory workers. But it's still very hard to compare, as food factory workers were physically at work during the first wave, so you would expect higher numbers, though maybe not hugely higher because they have PPE, the lack of which teachers have raised as increasing their risk of infection.

    As it turns out about 2% of food production workers have been infected. That seems pretty similar to the number of teachers infected if you take into account that food factory workers have been physically at work over the two waves.

    What teachers have done, with ventilating classrooms, avoiding the staff room, and having less hours per shift being exposed to large numbers of other people, and by sticking to the rules outside of school hours, is that they have kept their infection rate down to that of a worker who works in a similar environment but wears PPE. That's a massive achievement on their part and they should be commended for it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,570 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    JDD wrote: »
    It is since the first infection in March.

    The article is pay walled. Does it state that?

    The pertinent number of course, is number of infection since schools went back.

    .
    JDD wrote: »
    As it turns out about 2% of food production workers have been infected. That seems pretty similar to the number of teachers infected if you take into account that food factory workers have been physically at work over the two waves.

    Again though how many of them got infected because of slum conditions they are made live in?

    Should people who got infected who don't work be included in the comparable figures? If you are a working teacher you are 100% more likely to be employed than a baby.

    Like I said it's a nonsense number without context.

    Something we have had to get used to when it comes to schools.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    khalessi wrote: »
    I dont know who you are dealing with daily but I dont refer to my students as "disease ridden snotballs" so please don't.

    Was in keeping with the whole theme of these threads over the summer where children were being referred to constantly as disease vectors and other such pejorative terms in the context of why being in classrooms with up to 30 plus such children would be a disaster. I hope you can see I was being deliberately facetious as this talk track was never anything I subscribed to as the evidence was, for this virus anyway (also the case for influenza by the way), children are not more likely to spread the virus than adults. The whole disease vector thing coming for the propensity of kids to spread adenovirus, rhinovirus and norovirus freely through surface contact as they survive much better on surfaces than coronavirus or influenza


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,218 ✭✭✭khalessi


    Was in keeping with the whole theme of these threads over the summer where children were being referred to constantly as disease vectors and other such pejorative terms in the context of why being in classrooms with up to 30 plus such children would be a disaster. I hope you can see I was being deliberately facetious as this talk track was never anything I subscribed to as the evidence was, for this virus anyway (also the case for influenza by the way), children are not more likely to spread the virus than adults. The whole disease vector thing coming for the propensity of kids to spread adenovirus, rhinovirus and norovirus freely through surface contact as they survive much better on surfaces than coronavirus or influenza


    Regardless please dont.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    byhookorbycrook is a mod on the "Primary and Preschool" forum and I have seen him refer to kids as "little asbo" a few times!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    As mother of two snotballs who still insist on using their sleeve instead of a tissue I wish to point out I'm not offended. Neither are they. ( I checked).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,360 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    Hmmm.
    If only we had proper numbers from nphet and the HSE.
    The last 4 or 5 pages of this thread wouldnt have been necessary.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    JimmyVik wrote: »
    Hmmm.
    If only we had proper numbers from nphet and the HSE.
    The last 4 or 5 pages of this thread wouldnt have been necessary.

    No they would be replaced by 40 pages of nonsense interpretation...


  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Boggles wrote: »
    Which doesn't really tell us much.

    Again it depends on the variables. If you are going to list by profession you have to compare with profession.

    If it is since schools open, that is 7+ teachers a day getting infected.

    That on the face of it looks like a problem, but if 9 plumbers on average get infected a day not so much.

    What I have learned this week, is teachers in Russia have been classed the same as health care workers when it comes to priority vaccine roll out.

    Maybe they have data to back that up. Who knows.

    The suggestion from the twitter thread linked was 666 cases among teachers was further evidence of huge spread in schools. Since it was pointed out that this was at a lower rate than society in general so that contention was not supported by the data there' has been a re framing of the argument that teachers were out of society between March and September. If we accept that and take it to the extreme that zero teachers caught covid before schools returned, 1% of the population have had the virus since September and 1% of teachers also. So even though they have been exposed at work everyday from September to now, while large portions of the population have been working from home, they have still not caught the virus in greater numbers than society as a whole. That counts as a success in my book. Especially when teachers no doubt did catch the virus before September


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,360 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    meeeeh wrote: »
    No they would be replaced by 40 pages of nonsense interpretation...


    No they wouldnt. Its easy to interrogate complete data.
    What they provide us, the public, the people whos lives they are using the data to influence, with, is pure sh1te.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,570 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    The suggestion from the twitter thread linked was 666 cases among teachers was further evidence of huge spread in schools. Since it was pointed out that this was at a lower rate than society in general so that contention was not supported by the data there' has been a re framing of the argument that teachers were out of society between March and September. If we accept that and take it to the extreme that zero teachers caught covid before schools returned, 1% of the population have had the virus since September and 1% of teachers also. So even though they have been exposed at work everyday from September to now, while large portions of the population have been working from home, they have still not caught the virus in greater numbers than society as a whole. That counts as a success in my book. Especially when teachers no doubt did catch the virus before September

    But it could be 10 / 20 times higher than most other professions, or lower?

    Did it offer numbers on other school staff?


  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I see workers in education have been place at number 11 on the list for the vaccine and schools kids at the bottom of the list. What is the view on this in the context of the school return? Genuine question.

    https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/39038-provisional-vaccine-allocation-groups/


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Boggles wrote: »
    But it could be 10 / 20 times higher than most other professions, or lower?

    Did it offer numbers on other school staff?

    Its average at worst.


  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JimmyVik wrote: »
    No they wouldnt. Its easy to interrogate complete data.
    What they provide us, the public, the people whos lives they are using the data to influence, with, is pure sh1te.

    No such thing as complete data, there will always be some factor remaining unmeasured. What we can do is interpret the data we have, challenge the data by all means and ask for more data. What you cant do however is assume the data is being hidden or falsified just because you dont like what you see


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,570 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    I see workers in education have been place at number 11 on the list for the vaccine and schools kids at the bottom of the list. What is the view on this in the context of the school return? Genuine question.

    https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/39038-provisional-vaccine-allocation-groups/

    2 behind
    People aged 18-64 living or working in crowded settings

    5 behind
    Key workers

    They are just trolling the unions at this stage.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,859 ✭✭✭Lillyfae


    I see workers in education have been place at number 11 on the list for the vaccine and schools kids at the bottom of the list. What is the view on this in the context of the school return? Genuine question.

    https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/39038-provisional-vaccine-allocation-groups/

    I think it's fair, but I'm not sure why "Other healthcare workers not in direct patient contact" would be ahead of school staff. I'm not sure what they are either. Hospital administration? Lab staff? Cleaners? Canteen staff?


  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Boggles wrote: »
    2 behind



    5 behind



    They are just trolling the unions at this stage.

    Would think I will fall into category 10, or with a bit of luck 6


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    I see workers in education have been place at number 11 on the list for the vaccine and schools kids at the bottom of the list. What is the view on this in the context of the school return? Genuine question.

    https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/39038-provisional-vaccine-allocation-groups/

    Wouldn't some teachers fit under people working in crowded areas? I would class teachers under that and other supporting staff as working in education. However they will have to elaborate a bit more.

    School kids at the bottom of the list is fine.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 639 ✭✭✭Thats me


    JDD wrote: »

    Can't get through the paywall.. Do they refer any particular document where they got theirs data?

    I've found same on MSN, they writing:
    Students 'including schoolchildren' were 3,154 or 6.2%, while teachers were 666 cases.

    © HSPC Report of the profile of COVID-19 cases in healthcare workers in Ireland including 28/11/20

    I see such report on HPSC site: https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-19casesinhealthcareworkers/ - but no any teachers in it.


    All of this is looking suspicious :confused:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,570 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Wouldn't some teachers fit under people working in crowded areas?

    No, nor are they considered 'key workers', after all that. All though education is a core principle, one of the main reasons we have closed off large sections of our economy.

    Slap in the face, but sure hardly anything new.


  • Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Thats me wrote: »
    Can't get through the paywall.. Do they refer any particular document where they got theirs data?

    I've found same on MSN, they writing:



    I see such report on HPSC site: https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-19casesinhealthcareworkers/ - but no any teachers in it.


    All of this is looking suspicious :confused:

    Clusters report is due out tomorrow, maybe they got an early look. It often includes some extra detail


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 639 ✭✭✭Thats me


    Clusters report is due out tomorrow, maybe they got an early look. It often includes some extra detail

    Hmm.. Unlikely - cluster report is breakdown by place of "outbreak", not by profession.

    Suspecting HPSC are giving to people and to media different reports.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement