291–300 of 714 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question only ever asked by people in no danger (or who believe they're in no danger) of the consequences of what they propose.
There will always be some level of danger. Insisting on eliminating danger is irrational.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also parents are the caretakers of children. If they're sick or incapacitated or die, that's going to have a negative impact on children. As will having a greater number of essential workers becoming sick or dying.
If it was not possible to establish a clear link between school class surges and infection rates in 2 years, then there is no link. The CDC does have a list on which places transmit the virus and restaurants/cafe/bar/dancing/... were 3 of the top 5 entries if memory serves. The remaining 2 were hospitals and doctors’ offices. Many places that people think would spread the virus don’t. For example anything outside is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the article does a good job at looking at this as a trade-off. No where in the article do they state outright that there is no change to transmission. The main point is to ask the question "Is avoiding the damage to those that are older worth the damage to those that are younger?"
The question only ever asked by people in no danger (or who believe they're in no danger) of the consequences of what they propose.
That's pretty harsh. I can see where you're coming from it sometimes seems this way especially if you're discussing it on the internet. But I have found there are a few of these people who have thought about this and do have concern for the consequences and are willing to have reasonable discussions about it. So I don't think it is very constructive to generalize so negatively about people.
> "For the past two years, Americans have accepted more harm to children in exchange for less harm to adults. " The overall tone and style of this article is just... I don't know. As a parent of elementary school children, I spent 2020 and 2021 seeing this stuff first-hand. Having arguments with other (non-parent) liberal friends on social media. Once they discovered that I was out of step on this one item of the cur…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The quora answer [1] by Franklin Veaux to question "How can a disease with 1% mortality shut down the United States?" explains nicely that it is not binary live/die at all. Mind though that this was written in the beginning of the pandemic when we didn't have the same information as now, so numbers may be imprecise, but the explanation still stands. https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-disease-with-1-mortality-shu...
Nobody wants to get the disease which POSSIBLY could kill them or put them to hospital and perhaps financially bankrupt them and or give them bad long-term health outcomes. That has an effect on the behavior of everybody, except of course those who believe Covid is a "democratic hoax". Also with an evolving disease you don't know what its death-rate will be and it will depend on the preventive measures you and the go…
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...
Everyone will get infected. Shutting down can only delay that.
I'm not sure I like this article. They seems to overstate what the sources they link to claim. For example the article says > Some researchers are skeptical that school closures reduce Covid cases in most instances. But when you go to the study they link, it says > Although school closures reduce the number of contacts children have, and may decrease transmission, a study of 12 million adults in the UK found no diffe…
The part about the under-20-year-old children who fell to gun violence in Chicago raised my eye. Thats a problem but I don't know it's a covid problem, and I'm not certain that people over 18 count as children.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that relevant? The parents will all inevitably be exposed eventually. It doesn't matter whether the exposure happens through one of their children or someone else.
ECMO shortage
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seeing the lower face is important to reading emotion. The masks muffle speech as well. I wonder if children, especially in that critical 2-4 year-old period, will have stunted language and interpersonal skills. It's not right.
So personal anecdote our two year old is behind on speech, we had someone come in to evaluate him and he mentioned that he has been seeing it a lot, citing that because so many people are wearing masks, and the kids weren't spending more time around other people it had created a trend he had noticed.
And it was an extremely tame reply.
Is it just me or is the intolerance for dissent ramping up?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sentiment seems strange in 2022. Vaccines for teachers have been widely available for almost a year now.
> Vaccines for teachers have been widely available for almost a year now. You appear to have missed the news around the Omicron variant being much better at vaccine evasion than Delta. You can't compare the situation a year ago with the one now, which is unique and unprecedented, just like the pandemic was initially.