All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (15 Viewers)

[Maxp]

I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?

 

[JimEverett]

I agree with the crudeness criticism. But how is he not relying on facts? Maybe I am misinterpreting her, but I think there is ample factual support for kids returning to school in-person.

 

[The moose]

That guy is just such an embarrassment.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Such a forking embarrassment.

 

[Ayo]

I agree with the crudeness criticism. But how is he not relying on facts? Maybe I am misinterpreting her, but I think there is ample factual support for kids returning to school in-person.

and there is factual support for kids not returning to school (Israel and Hong Kong) and/or schools structuring a return differently depending on age - with jumps in transmissions at 12+ and again at 15+. So high schools should be treated differently than elementary schools, no? Isn't it also problematic not to distinguish acc to age and grade level?

Also, countries that are returning to school have been handling the crisis much better than the US has, so that bears consideration, too. So 'factual support' kind of falters a bit or becomes more complicated if you're drawing a comparison between the US and, say, Denmark.

We are talking about opening schools here, and it looks like many will not be full-time.

And we are hitting Phase 3 of reopening here in the next couple of weeks.

Louisiana may be going back to Phase 1.

So, I think there's a lot more to consider here when talking about "returning to school in-person." What are the safety measures in place? Is there funding for sanitizer and masks? How will bussing be clean? What will be the cafeteria changes? What's the physical infrastructure to support increased handwashing? How will you encourage social distancing?

These are all measures that need to be decided prior to re-opening. And I can say, from personal direct contact with people in a few different places in the States, that this varies wildly.

Kennedy may have a couple of "facts" behind him, but it goes deeper than that.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I agree with the crudeness criticism. But how is he not relying on facts? Maybe I am misinterpreting her, but I think there is ample factual support for kids returning to school in-person.

What factual support? As someone working in healthcare who sees these reports daily, anything that says it's safe for kids to return to school in-person is wrong on every level and needs to take several seats.

Hell, one employee just got told her kids have to be tested now and quarantined because another child at their daycare is sick and has tested positive. Anyone who says this virus doesn't affect children is either woefully ignorant or plain forking lying and that's not even counuting the asymptomatic ones who will bring it home to their families.

 

[JimEverett]

and there is factual support for kids not returning to school (Israel and Hong Kong) and/or schools structuring a return differently depending on age - with jumps in transmissions at 12+ and again at 15+. So high schools should be treated differently than elementary schools, no? Isn't it also problematic not to distinguish acc to age and grade level?

Also, countries that are returning to school have been handling the crisis much better than the US has, so that bears consideration, too. So 'factual support' kind of falters a bit or becomes more complicated if you're drawing a comparison between the US and, say, Denmark.

We are talking about opening schools here, and it looks like many will not be full-time.

And we are hitting Phase 3 of reopening here in the next couple of weeks.

Louisiana may be going back to Phase 1.

So, I think there's a lot more to consider here when talking about "returning to school in-person." What are the safety measures in place? Is there funding for sanitizer and masks? How will bussing be clean? What will be the cafeteria changes? What's the physical infrastructure to support increased handwashing? How will you encourage social distancing?

These are all measures that need to be decided prior to re-opening. And I can say, from personal direct contact with people in a few different places in the States, that this varies wildly.

Kennedy may have a couple of "facts" behind him, but it goes deeper than that.

Yeah - I am not the one saying only one side of the debate has the facts - it is what I was arguing against.

 

[JimEverett]

What factual support? As someone working in healthcare who sees these reports daily, anything that says it's safe for kids to return to school in-person is wrong on every level and needs to take several seats.

Hell, one employee just got told her kids have to be tested now and quarantined because another child at their daycare is sick and has tested positive. Anyone who says this virus doesn't affect children is either woefully ignorant or plain forking lying and that's not even counuting the asymptomatic ones who will bring it home to their families.

You can start with the American Academy of Pediatrics:

With the above principles in mind, the AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school. The importance of in-person learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020. Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation. This, in turn, places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality. Beyond the educational impact and social impact of school closures, there has been substantial impact on food security and physical activity for children and families.

Policy makers must also consider the mounting evidence regarding COVID-19 in children and adolescents, including the role they may play in transmission of the infection. SARS-CoV-2 appears to behave differently in children and adolescents than other common respiratory viruses, such as influenza, on which much of the current guidance regarding school closures is based. Although children and adolescents play a major role in amplifying influenza outbreaks, to date, this does not appear to be the case with SARS-CoV-2. Although many questions remain, the preponderance of evidence indicates that children and adolescents are less likely to be symptomatic and less likely to have severe disease resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, children may be less likely to become infected and to spread infection. Policies to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within schools must be balanced with the known harms to children, adolescents, families, and the community by keeping children at home.

Finally, policy makers should acknowledge that COVID-19 policies are intended to mitigate, not eliminate, risk. No single action or set of actions will completely eliminate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, but implementation of several coordinated interventions can greatly reduce that risk. For example, where physical distance cannot be maintained, students (over the age of 2 years) and staff can wear face coverings (when feasible). In the following sections, we review some general principles that policy makers should consider as they plan for the coming school year. For all of these, education for the entire school community regarding these measures should begin early, ideally at least several weeks before the start of the school year.

https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning-considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/

As Ayo pointed out above - there is certainly good reason and facts to oppose students going back to school in-person at this time and/or in the near future. But to me the disagreement isn't over "facts," its over the interpretation of facts, and aversion to risk at a minimum. One side of this debate is not the side of "facts" or science.

 

[MT15]

I think the frustration with the administration isn’t lack of facts, it’s lack of planning. Lack of commitment to taking any precautions whatsoever. Just “schools gotta open”. Forgive us for being skeptical given the haphazard nature of the overall response to this pandemic.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

You can start with the American Academy of Pediatrics:

https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning-considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/

As Ayo pointed out above - there is certainly good reason and facts to oppose students going back to school in-person at this time and/or in the near future. But to me the disagreement isn't over "facts," its over the interpretation of facts, and aversion to risk at a minimum. One side of this debate is not the side of "facts" or science.

The bolded is not a fact or support for returning to school now. Is it a goal to get there? Of course. But the fact is that schools are not ready for in-person return because they can't adequately address the concerns the AAP lays out they should consider. And the fact that even they admit that the affects on children is still small, especially compared to what is known for adults.

 

[B4YOU]

Yea, there are loads of problems with the student visa program, but not giving returning students a covid waiver for online courses should have been automatic.

I don’t think we should be giving student visas to anyone attending the Devry type colleges, but that isn’t what this is about.

The Trump admin has rescinded this policy and it looks like they will compromise pretty much exactly as I expected.

“According to another source, the White House is now focused on having the rule apply only to new students, rather than students already in the US. The White House declined to comment on an ongoing policy process.”

Trump administration drops restrictions on online-only instruction for foreign students | CNN Politics

The Trump administration has rescinded its policy that would bar international students who only take online courses from staying in the US, a federal judge announced Tuesday in Boston.

www.cnn.com

 

[samiam5211]

The Trump admin has rescinded this policy and it looks like they will compromise pretty much exactly as I expected.

“According to another source, the White House is now focused on having the rule apply only to new students, rather than students already in the US. The White House declined to comment on an ongoing policy process.”

Trump administration drops restrictions on online-only instruction for foreign students | CNN Politics

The Trump administration has rescinded its policy that would bar international students who only take online courses from staying in the US, a federal judge announced Tuesday in Boston.

www.cnn.com

I think the universities called his bluff.

 

[MT15]

i really hate that we have failed so hard at this.

 

[gummbo]

i really hate that we have failed so hard at this.

864511320,

 

[nolaspe]

Well, this is terrifying...

Trump Administration Strips C.D.C. of Control of Coronavirus Data (Published 2020)

Hospitals have been ordered to bypass the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and send all patient information to a central database in Washington, raising questions about transparency.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Dragon]

Well, this is terrifying...

Trump Administration Strips C.D.C. of Control of Coronavirus Data (Published 2020)

Hospitals have been ordered to bypass the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and send all patient information to a central database in Washington, raising questions about transparency.

www.nytimes.com

Well this administration seems to live in an "Alternate" world. One where facts are whatevet they say it is and the number of dead and infected will drop by just not counting...

 

[nolaspe]

Maybe this was posted earlier, but this is beyond lowering of IQ's... this is insane...

 

[V Chip]

You can start with the American Academy of Pediatrics:

https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning-considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/

As Ayo pointed out above - there is certainly good reason and facts to oppose students going back to school in-person at this time and/or in the near future. But to me the disagreement isn't over "facts," its over the interpretation of facts, and aversion to risk at a minimum. One side of this debate is not the side of "facts" or science.

The AAP released this statement on the 10th.

https://services.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2020/pediatricians-educators-and-superintendents-urge-a-safe-return-to-school-this-fall/

"Returning to school is important for the healthy development and well-being of children, but we must pursue re-opening in a way that is safe for all students, teachers and staff. Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools. Public health agencies must make recommendations based on evidence, not politics. We should leave it to health experts to tell us when the time is best to open up school buildings, and listen to educators and administrators to shape how we do it.

“Local school leaders, public health experts, educators and parents must be at the center of decisions about how and when to reopen schools, taking into account the spread of COVID-19 in their communities and the capacities of school districts to adapt safety protocols to make in-person learning safe and feasible. For instance, schools in areas with high levels of COVID-19 community spread should not be compelled to reopen against the judgment of local experts. A one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate for return to school decisions.

“Reopening schools in a way that maximizes safety, learning, and the well-being of children, teachers, and staff will clearly require substantial new investments in our schools and campuses. We call on Congress and the administration to provide the federal resources needed to ensure that inadequate funding does not stand in the way of safely educating and caring for children in our schools. Withholding funding from schools that do not open in person fulltime would be a misguided approach, putting already financially strapped schools in an impossible position that would threaten the health of students and teachers.

 

[superchuck500]

The AAP released this statement on the 10th.

https://services.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2020/pediatricians-educators-and-superintendents-urge-a-safe-return-to-school-this-fall/

It also must be noted that the AAP’s guidance calls for precautions that are within the context of local virus metrics. Localities that have historically high case counts and % positives above 10% are considered high risk. That’s most of the south and west but it isn’t everywhere.

It’s not a one-size fits all, and again the issue is being politicized away from what is otherwise sensible.