COVID-19 - READ THE RULES BEFORE REPLYING

[Commodus]

22 hours ago, FakeNSA said:

I actually am not forgetting the teachers, but I am more concerned about students. Long term, compromising schools could decimate graduation rates, especially for poor and/or rural students.

Maybe new policies have to be enacted for fragile teachers (enforced 10 ft social distancing, and a TA to work with the students more closely), but I believe schools have to be reopened.

 

I don't know how you can safely reopen schools without vaccines or surefire treatments.

 

Yeah, you could protect the teachers, but what about the kids? Even the older ones are unlikely to keep their distance. And while children are more likely to emerge unscathed, remember that they'll pass on any infections to their families. I don't think little Jane or Jimmy wants to risk killing their parents just so they can finish Grade 3 on schedule.

[Donut417]

9 minutes ago, Commodus said:

vaccines

That’s a whole other bag of worms. Especially in the US. But yes, we need to take proper precautions. Especially in schools where you have 30+ kids per room. 

[Commodus]

2 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

That’s a whole other bag of worms. Especially in the US. But yes, we need to take proper precautions. Especially in schools where you have 30+ kids per room. 

I hear you on that one. Thankfully, you don't need absolutely everyone to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity... but if it was bad for anti-vaccination parents and their kids before, it's going to be considerably worse now.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

13 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Im kinda surprised that online courses haven't made it down to lower education. I mean all the colleges I have been to do online learning.

Well, at higher leves, and at higher specialization, online courses are close substitutes for regular classes. Sometimes even better. But the further you move towards elementary education, the more imperfect substitutes they become. At some point, if they're not going to class they may as well be watching Teletubbies on a loop...

 

 

13 hours ago, Donut417 said:

For K to 6 I can see having them go to school, besides learning they get those social skills going. But grades 7-12 they get a smart phone and promptly loose all those social skills. 

It's more than socializing, it's how they learn their attention span, and the level of abstraction needed to do away with all situational stimuli. Still, there may be a workaround for that, with a new type of online teaching that suits perfectly lower levels of education, but I don't think it's been invented yet. What we currently have is too focused on doing the same in front of a camera, and/or suited to higher education (where often most of the learning is done by reading a book or practicing on your own anyway). I'm no education expert in any case, so maybe it's not that no one came up with a method, but just that I haven't come across it yet.

 

 

With that said, schools did move to e-learning regimes to finish the school year, at all levels, or at least some did. It doesn't address the issues @FakeNSA mentioned, though, and it isn't sustainable long term in its current form, just a short-term patch...

[FakeNSA]

34 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

With that said, schools did move to e-learning regimes to finish the school year, at all levels, or at least some did. It doesn't address the issues @FakeNSA mentioned, though, and it isn't sustainable long term in its current form, just a short-term patch...

To be clear: I don't think E-learning is the end of the world as we know it.

However, in its current form, with current economic realities, it could decimate the possibility of the poorest students ever graduating.

~15% of LA high-school students never logged into online learning, ~25% did not participate daily. Mostly the poorest students, whose parents can't be present to keep them accountable, and whose internet access at home is inconsistent.

 

Our current policies seem unsustainable: That's why I am pushing for at least a partial return. Especially with the rural challenges that I see in my area (see above post.)

Source: https://edsource.org/2020/thousands-of-los-angeles-high-school-students-are-not-accessing-online-learning-during-school-closures/627448

[FakeNSA]

1 hour ago, Commodus said:

 

I don't know how you can safely reopen schools without vaccines or surefire treatments.

 

Yeah, you could protect the teachers, but what about the kids? Even the older ones are unlikely to keep their distance. And while children are more likely to emerge unscathed, remember that they'll pass on any infections to their families. I don't think little Jane or Jimmy wants to risk killing their parents just so they can finish Grade 3 on schedule.

To be clear: It's not about grade 3.

Its about the fact that once a low-income student falls behind, their likelyhood of graduating high-school at all plummets.

 

This year will seem fairly benign, but as this continues, especially if we wait for a vaccine (for a virus..... likely quite difficult if not impossible), we will see more and more kids suffer from this, for the rest of their lives.

 

Anyway, just my opinion.

[Commodus]

24 minutes ago, FakeNSA said:

To be clear: It's not about grade 3.

Its about the fact that once a low-income student falls behind, their likelyhood of graduating high-school at all plummets.

 

This year will seem fairly benign, but as this continues, especially if we wait for a vaccine (for a virus..... likely quite difficult if not impossible), we will see more and more kids suffer from this, for the rest of their lives.

 

Anyway, just my opinion.

Oh, I agree that it'll be hard for many students, especially those that can't keep up online... but what choice do we realistically have short of directly subsidizing remote education for those people?

 

Besides, remember that many of those low-income students are part of higher-risk groups, since they don't have as much access to healthy food, exercise and healthcare. Making someone like that go to school and stand a high chance of getting sick isn't an act of kindness, it's cruelty to the entire family.

 

I'm not lumping you in this group because you're clearly more understanding, but the people who insist on reopening schools at all costs remind me a bit of the pandemic deniers we saw earlier in the thread. They clung to the fantasy that they could force the world to go back to normal by reopening everything and acting like the virus was no worse than the flu.

 

But as I'm sure you know, that's not how life works. If you tell people there's a real chance they'll get a serious illness just by going to a school, the bar or a theatre... many of them aren't going to go. And legally requiring them to go is bound to foster a lot of drama, infections or both. Honestly, I would either commit a massive amount of money to remote education or just accept that school won't resume in earnest until 2021.

[FakeNSA]

53 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Oh, I agree that it'll be hard for many students, especially those that can't keep up online... but what choice do we realistically have short of directly subsidizing remote education for those people?

 

Besides, remember that many of those low-income students are part of higher-risk groups, since they don't have as much access to healthy food, exercise and healthcare. Making someone like that go to school and stand a high chance of getting sick isn't an act of kindness, it's cruelty to the entire family.

 

I'm not lumping you in this group because you're clearly more understanding, but the people who insist on reopening schools at all costs remind me a bit of the pandemic deniers we saw earlier in the thread. They clung to the fantasy that they could force the world to go back to normal by reopening everything and acting like the virus was no worse than the flu.

 

But as I'm sure you know, that's not how life works. If you tell people there's a real chance they'll get a serious illness just by going to a school, the bar or a theatre... many of them aren't going to go. And legally requiring them to go is bound to foster a lot of drama, infections or both. Honestly, I would either commit a massive amount of money to remote education or just accept that school won't resume in earnest until 2021.

Personally, I don't know that I would re-enact truancy laws, but I think schools should go back in session in person, at least as an option for students.

Long term, I could see the effects of these closures being far worse than covid. But IDK.

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, FakeNSA said:

go back in session in person, at least as an option for students.

Well for like 7-12 they could do like colleges do. 1 to 2 days in the classroom and the rest online. This would limit exposure and potentially make smaller class sizes. 

[PhantomJaguarr]

Hey, Newsom. I still got my haircut. I don’t know why hair salons had to close when 7/10 outbreaks here locally came from restaurants and bars.

[ARikozuM]

Just now, PhantomJaguar77 said:

Hey, Newsom. I still got my haircut. I don’t know why hair salons had to close when 7/10 outbreaks here locally came from restaurants and bars.

Because people will just move to another venue. It'd be one thing if all salons had to do appointments only with a limit there'd be almost no issues and minimal transmission. 

[PhantomJaguarr]

21 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Because people will just move to another venue. It'd be one thing if all salons had to do appointments only with a limit there'd be almost no issues and minimal transmission. 

Salons here paid thousands of dollars out of pocket to make it safer for clients. Mine was by appointment only too before they had to shutdown again. My appointment was a couple days after that happened. Smh.
 

I had the haircut outside at my hairstylist’s house. Nice view from her backyard. We both had masks on of course. It was informative to get someone else’s perspective for once. The pandemic hasn’t affected me like them. They aren’t sure if their business can survive anymore restrictions. I could tell they were trying to hide their stress.

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, PhantomJaguar77 said:

Salons here paid thousands of dollars out of pocket to make it safer for clients. Mine was by appointment only too before they had to shutdown again. My appointment was a couple days after that happened. Smh.
 

I had the haircut outside at my hairstylist’s house. Nice view from her backyard. We both had masks on of course. It was informative to get someone else’s perspective for once. The pandemic hasn’t affected me like them. They aren’t sure if their business can survive anymore restrictions. I could tell they were trying to hide their stress.

Which is why I've been advocating for a month-long shutdown with compensation for individuals. The fact that we're now flopping around is testament that no one is decisive nor cooperative enough to subdue danger. 

[PhantomJaguarr]

51 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Which is why I've been advocating for a month-long shutdown with compensation for individuals. The fact that we're now flopping around is testament that no one is decisive nor cooperative enough to subdue danger. 

But my State already had a full lockdown from mid-March until the end of May. Now we're in the lead of most cases. Granted, we are like over a dozen states combined into one population wise. It doesn't matter what is implemented if the people don't do their part and follow the rules, which the big issue is wearing masks. I see that clear as day everyday, when I'm at work or picking up some takeout at a restaurant. Some people just walk in not giving 2 shits about wearing a mask when there are signs everywhere that they are required when entering.

 

Quote

Newsom's announcement comes as California has surpassed New York for the most coronavirus cases in the country, with more than 413,000 confirmed cases.

https://abc7news.com/what-did-governor-newsom-say-today-announcement-covid-california-update/6328859/

 

 

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, PhantomJaguar77 said:

But my State already had a full lockdown from mid-March until the end of May. Now we're in the lead of most cases. Granted, we are like over a dozen states combined into one population wise. It doesn't matter what is implemented if the people don't do their part and follow the rules, which the big issue is wearing masks. I see that clear as day everyday, when I'm at work or picking up some takeout at a restaurant. Some people just walk in not giving 2 shits about wearing a mask when there are signs everywhere that they are required when entering.

 

https://abc7news.com/what-did-governor-newsom-say-today-announcement-covid-california-update/6328859/

 

 

You have to add a penalty for not wearing it or a faceshield. It's not your right to be a vector when something could cause massive damage and we're all bickering about personal freedoms. Nobody wants a contagious case of [disease] walking around and knowingly infecting others. "It's just the flu"... Okay, then it spreads like the flu and you stay the f#ck home for a 5 days until you're better. Instead, that crowd walks around like it's nothing. Everyone has to do their part. The compensation should have been for everyone directly rather than through PPP or a one-time UBI. It should have been anyone in the IRS database auto receives to their previous method. Instead we gave it to banks. 

 

Back on topic: Same thing happens here. "Oh, do you require masks?" I'd appreciate if you could wear one to accelerate us to normalcy. [customer leaves] Fine then. I was told to not wear a mask at a pizzeria and I just left with my $50 in hand. I don't think we'll be out of this before the end of the year. 

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

 

 

Back on topic: Same thing happens here. "Oh, do you require masks?" I'd appreciate if you could wear one to accelerate us to normalcy. [customer leaves] Fine then. I was told to not wear a mask at a pizzeria and I just left with my $50 in hand. I don't think we'll be out of this before the end of the year. 

We nearly were,  we were definitely on that trajectory, then something happened within our state.  All other states seem to be staying on the same trajectory except for Victoria (my state).  We have nose dived so hard you'd think they didn't do anything but pay lip service to the situation given the outcome.

[ARikozuM]

13 minutes ago, mr moose said:

We nearly were,  we were definitely on that trajectory, then something happened within our state.  All other states seem to be staying on the same trajectory except for Victoria (my state).  We have nose dived so hard you'd think they didn't do anything but pay lip service to the situation given the outcome.

I'm going to assume that your cases are dying down. Great times then. 

 

Our state, or most states, are headed by yes men who can't think for themselves or refuse to think for themselves. 

 

There's currently talk of giving immunity to all businesses for customers and employees who contract COVID. It's amazing that we can reward doing nothing while giving nothing to those who were proactive. 

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm going to assume that your cases are dying down. Great times then. 

Nope, they were dying down, we were down to single and 0 digit days for quite a few months, then we find out the security company wasn't actually providing any security for quarantines and that the government haven't been contact tracing all the outbreaks, now we are back up to 400 a day new cases.   Mind you the rest of the country is still enjoying a very low rate of new cases (some states being at zero for a over a month now).  

 

5 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Our state, or most states, are headed by yes men who can't think for themselves or refuse to think for themselves. 

This is the exact reason we are back in the poo,  the most aggravating thing about all this is that the when we point out the only difference between our state and other states we get told to stop being stupid.   Where there is smoke there is fire and it's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that if you stop tracing infection and don't monitor current cases then the end result is an outbreak/second wave.   The government should have been doing what was right and not playing the political lips service game.   Every other politician in the country realized this wasn't a political issue and so stopped being politicians except Dan andrews and now we are all paying for it. 

 

5 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

There's currently talk of giving immunity to all businesses for customers and employees who contract COVID. It's amazing that we can reward doing nothing while giving nothing to those who were proactive. 

 

It defies all rationality. 

 

 

 

[PhantomJaguarr]

41 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I don't think we'll be out of this before the end of the year. 

I caught info from my hairstylist whose relative works for a major pharmaceutical company, one of the many working on a vaccine. He said any sense of coming back to normal would take three years at least. Pls no.

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, PhantomJaguar77 said:

I caught info from my hairstylist whose relative works for a major pharmaceutical company, one of the many working on a vaccine. He said any sense of coming back to normal would take three years at least. Pls no.

The antibodies only seem to last 3 months on average, so if you've haven't been exposed to it for more than 3 months, you're bound to get it again. 

 

I don't trust a vaccine unless it undergoes the normal, not fast-tracked, methods of discovery and manufacture. I don't think the vaccine will be necessary except for those that are compromised or high-risk. 

[captain_to_fire]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

I don't think the vaccine will be necessary except for those that are compromised or high-risk. 

Currently on immunosuppressive drugs because of an autoimmune disease. I’m interested of being vaccinated for Covid-19 but my personal requirements would be seeing a cohort and a blind study that it lasts for at least 10 months. I’ve seen cases of recovered Covid-19 patients getting reinfected after a month or two which means that natural infection yields short term immunity. I’m optimistic that the likes of Moderna, et.al. would be able to produce a vaccine that stimulates immunity longer than three months but at the same time, I’m realistic that the protection provided by these vaccine candidates might not last longer than six months. It’s possible that these vaccines will require multiple booster shots to make protection last longer. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by captain_to_fire

[Zodiark1593]

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

We nearly were,  we were definitely on that trajectory, then something happened within our state.  All other states seem to be staying on the same trajectory except for Victoria (my state).  We have nose dived so hard you'd think they didn't do anything but pay lip service to the situation given the outcome.

Given how hasty the restrictions were retracted, I wonder if Newsom got a sudden, very nasty case of sticker shock at how much money sustaining a lockdown would eat. Keeping in mind wildfire season is about upon us, and requires additional money to be kept in reserve. 
 

Add to that is windy conditions will probably cause PG&e to deliberately shut off power again (which, depending on area and carrier, also tends to impact cell service). Can’t imagine many people will sit quietly for a Stay-at-Home order with power and (for some) cell service cut off for multiple days. 

[atxcyclist]

4 hours ago, PhantomJaguar77 said:

I caught info from my hairstylist whose relative works for a major pharmaceutical company, one of the many working on a vaccine. He said any sense of coming back to normal would take three years at least. Pls no.

If for two months everyone only did essential things outside of their house, and when they did both socially distanced and wore a mask, this would be at a bare minimum level domestically. We'd also have to 100% eliminate all foreign travel until there's a suitable vaccine.

 

None of that will likely happen in the USA though, so either the virus or an economic collapse proceeding the virus will get all of us, unless we actually try.

[PhantomJaguarr]

Oh snap, one of Moderna's vaccine trials are happening right around the corner to me. One of 6 locations in California that were chosen. Pretty neat. Can even sign up to participate.

Quote

In just days, Dr. Scott Overcash will soon be overseeing a first-of-its-kind trial of a coronavirus vaccine created by the American biotech company Moderna. Starting as early as next week, the first of 350-500 local patients will begin receiving the vaccine. The same one has already been given to patients in phases one and two of the trial. This is the next and possibly final step before FDA approval.

 

"What's a little bit different about this particular situation is that the different phases have all been sort of compressed and are all ongoing at the same time," Overcash explained.

https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/abc-10news-exclusive-san-diego-clinic-to-begin-trials-of-coronavirus-vaccine

[Commodus]

12 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

If for two months everyone only did essential things outside of their house, and when they did both socially distanced and wore a mask, this would be at a bare minimum level domestically. We'd also have to 100% eliminate all foreign travel until there's a suitable vaccine.

 

None of that will likely happen in the USA though, so either the virus or an economic collapse proceeding the virus will get all of us, unless we actually try.

One of the things we've definitely learned from this pandemic: many people are horrible at understanding the gravity of a pandemic.

 

In virtually every country I've seen, many people only seem to accept very simplistic policies: either it's a total, never-leave-the-house lockdown or completely back to normal. Loosen restrictions even slightly and people have this almost fatalistic urge to have as much close contact as possible and get their entire family sick.

 

Basically... the next time something like this happens (hopefully not for a long time), authorities will have to be particularly strict and treat people almost like children, because a lot of people seem to have very little restraint.