[OutsiderFan]

https://thehill.com/changing-america/wel...tested-are

[OutsiderFan]

https://thehill.com/changing-america/wel...tested-are

[Farm93]

https://thehill.com/changing-america/wel...tested-are

That's not shocking at all given the rate of positive tests in the state.   Many of the others will get the virus in the fall since that state seems to have very loose requirements on PPE and social distancing.

I expect the rest of the world will race to FL to see what happens when a large percentage of the school age population are shedding the virus and that same group of children are also able to move between home and school daily.

A FL State Senator based in Orlando yesterday declared, I believe on CNN, that the COVID status in Florida was acceptable, and that he doesn't wear a mask when he goes to indoor public spaces.   That interview was disturbing, but given the takeaways from that interview the finding in the link seems rather predictable IMHO.

Got to do a lot more to shock me on our COVID management at this point.

Of course I live in a county where the Board of Education declared that schools should be open and masks should not be required, so for me almost all actual COVID findings will be categorized as predictable or expected rather than shocking.

[Farm93]

https://thehill.com/changing-america/wel...tested-are

That's not shocking at all given the rate of positive tests in the state.   Many of the others will get the virus in the fall since that state seems to have very loose requirements on PPE and social distancing.

I expect the rest of the world will race to FL to see what happens when a large percentage of the school age population are shedding the virus and that same group of children are also able to move between home and school daily.

A FL State Senator based in Orlando yesterday declared, I believe on CNN, that the COVID status in Florida was acceptable, and that he doesn't wear a mask when he goes to indoor public spaces.   That interview was disturbing, but given the takeaways from that interview the finding in the link seems rather predictable IMHO.

Got to do a lot more to shock me on our COVID management at this point.

Of course I live in a county where the Board of Education declared that schools should be open and masks should not be required, so for me almost all actual COVID findings will be categorized as predictable or expected rather than shocking.

[OutsiderFan]

My shock was *just* that 30% of children being tested are positive. Given most are probably asymptomatic - have no real reason to be tested - the virus spread in the state must be staggering.

[OutsiderFan]

My shock was *just* that 30% of children being tested are positive. Given most are probably asymptomatic - have no real reason to be tested - the virus spread in the state must be staggering.

[dabigv13]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

[dabigv13]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

[Genuine Realist]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

[Genuine Realist]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

[BostonCard]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

That was my first thought, but keep in mind that there is selection bias going on here; children are presumably only being tested if they are symptomatic or close contacts of someone infected.  If there were a random sample of children in the state, then you might think that in the next two months you could get to herd immunity and safely open the schools.  Alas, I suspect the fraction of kids who are not tested who would be positive if they had been, is a lot lower than 30% so we are probably a ways away from herd immunity.

BC

[BostonCard]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

That was my first thought, but keep in mind that there is selection bias going on here; children are presumably only being tested if they are symptomatic or close contacts of someone infected.  If there were a random sample of children in the state, then you might think that in the next two months you could get to herd immunity and safely open the schools.  Alas, I suspect the fraction of kids who are not tested who would be positive if they had been, is a lot lower than 30% so we are probably a ways away from herd immunity.

BC

[stupac2]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

That was my first thought, but keep in mind that there is selection bias going on here; children are presumably only being tested if they are symptomatic or close contacts of someone infected.  If there were a random sample of children in the state, then you might think that in the next two months you could get to herd immunity and safely open the schools.  Alas, I suspect the fraction of kids who are not tested who would be positive if they had been, is a lot lower than 30% so we are probably a ways away from herd immunity.

BC

Right, unless you think there's a reason for, during summer break, kids to be more likely to get it than adults (if anything the opposite seems more likely), this would imply that FL has ~6.5M cases (confirmed is ~300k) and that there should be ~30k total deaths (assuming 0.5% IFR), when there are only 4700 currently. Yeah, deaths lag, but not by that much. 
This is selection bias, and not what you should expect to see for the overall population.

[stupac2]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

That was my first thought, but keep in mind that there is selection bias going on here; children are presumably only being tested if they are symptomatic or close contacts of someone infected.  If there were a random sample of children in the state, then you might think that in the next two months you could get to herd immunity and safely open the schools.  Alas, I suspect the fraction of kids who are not tested who would be positive if they had been, is a lot lower than 30% so we are probably a ways away from herd immunity.

BC

Right, unless you think there's a reason for, during summer break, kids to be more likely to get it than adults (if anything the opposite seems more likely), this would imply that FL has ~6.5M cases (confirmed is ~300k) and that there should be ~30k total deaths (assuming 0.5% IFR), when there are only 4700 currently. Yeah, deaths lag, but not by that much. 
This is selection bias, and not what you should expect to see for the overall population.

[Genuine Realist]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

That was my first thought, but keep in mind that there is selection bias going on here; children are presumably only being tested if they are symptomatic or close contacts of someone infected.  If there were a random sample of children in the state, then you might think that in the next two months you could get to herd immunity and safely open the schools.  Alas, I suspect the fraction of kids who are not tested who would be positive if they had been, is a lot lower than 30% so we are probably a ways away from herd immunity.

BC

I thought of that, too, but we're in thought experiment country. Assume that it is discovered that a brobdingnagian percentage of the non-geezer public has the virus, in weak or asymptomatic form. This seems to be good and bad news.

Of course, it does the geezer population (me) no good at all. In fact, i do believe we have to maintain even greater social distance, until we eventually die of boredom and thereby solve a pressing actuarial problem. But 'normal' social activities resume for the less vulnerable. Have I got this wrong?

BTW, don't mean to be political, but that would be pretty much the equation Boris Johnson sought for Great Britain way back when.

[Genuine Realist]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

You probably meant this rhetorically, but isn't  it, in its perverse way, good news?

That was my first thought, but keep in mind that there is selection bias going on here; children are presumably only being tested if they are symptomatic or close contacts of someone infected.  If there were a random sample of children in the state, then you might think that in the next two months you could get to herd immunity and safely open the schools.  Alas, I suspect the fraction of kids who are not tested who would be positive if they had been, is a lot lower than 30% so we are probably a ways away from herd immunity.

BC

I thought of that, too, but we're in thought experiment country. Assume that it is discovered that a brobdingnagian percentage of the non-geezer public has the virus, in weak or asymptomatic form. This seems to be good and bad news.

Of course, it does the geezer population (me) no good at all. In fact, i do believe we have to maintain even greater social distance, until we eventually die of boredom and thereby solve a pressing actuarial problem. But 'normal' social activities resume for the less vulnerable. Have I got this wrong?

BTW, don't mean to be political, but that would be pretty much the equation Boris Johnson sought for Great Britain way back when.

[teejers1]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

I'll re-ask the question here I did in another thread which also rejected out of hand the notion of re-opening schools based on, primarily, adult safety (teachers/staff/parents):

when will "science" say it's safe enough to re-open schools?

Until there is a vaccine, there will ALWAYS be increased risk for teachers when schools re-open and a bunch of kids are running around.  I don't object to highlighting risks and advocating for teacher safety.

What I object to is the "throw up your hands, it's hopeless" approach.  Don't just say "it's not safe," unless you're prepared to indicate what would make it sufficiently safe.  How about efforts to minimize risk on campus?  And if your belief is "no school until widespread vaccine," then just own up to it.  At least then we'll know where you prioritize educating kids in person.

Fundamentally, I disagree with the notion that "it's hopeless" - which is what so many articles on this topic insinuate.  No answers, proposed solutions, just more alarmism/doomsdayism.  Menlo does not believe that in-school education is hopeless; neither does Woodside Priory . . . to name two high schools on the Peninsula that I believe are planning to have kids on campus this fall.

So once again, the elites/well-to-do get the benefits and the masses are trailing.  Twas ever thus, I suppose.

[teejers1]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

I'll re-ask the question here I did in another thread which also rejected out of hand the notion of re-opening schools based on, primarily, adult safety (teachers/staff/parents):

when will "science" say it's safe enough to re-open schools?

Until there is a vaccine, there will ALWAYS be increased risk for teachers when schools re-open and a bunch of kids are running around.  I don't object to highlighting risks and advocating for teacher safety.

What I object to is the "throw up your hands, it's hopeless" approach.  Don't just say "it's not safe," unless you're prepared to indicate what would make it sufficiently safe.  How about efforts to minimize risk on campus?  And if your belief is "no school until widespread vaccine," then just own up to it.  At least then we'll know where you prioritize educating kids in person.

Fundamentally, I disagree with the notion that "it's hopeless" - which is what so many articles on this topic insinuate.  No answers, proposed solutions, just more alarmism/doomsdayism.  Menlo does not believe that in-school education is hopeless; neither does Woodside Priory . . . to name two high schools on the Peninsula that I believe are planning to have kids on campus this fall.

So once again, the elites/well-to-do get the benefits and the masses are trailing.  Twas ever thus, I suppose.

[Goose]

There are studies coming out of schools in Germany that re-opened indoors with full class size. While the USA isn't Germany, maybe we can learn from what they did and evaluate their results. Jury is still out, but somebody else is doing the experiment.

[Goose]

There are studies coming out of schools in Germany that re-opened indoors with full class size. While the USA isn't Germany, maybe we can learn from what they did and evaluate their results. Jury is still out, but somebody else is doing the experiment.

[lex24]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

I'll re-ask the question here I did in another thread which also rejected out of hand the notion of re-opening schools based on, primarily, adult safety (teachers/staff/parents):

when will "science" say it's safe enough to re-open schools?

Until there is a vaccine, there will ALWAYS be increased risk for teachers when schools re-open and a bunch of kids are running around.  I don't object to highlighting risks and advocating for teacher safety.

What I object to is the "throw up your hands, it's hopeless" approach.  Don't just say "it's not safe," unless you're prepared to indicate what would make it sufficiently safe.  How about efforts to minimize risk on campus?  And if your belief is "no school until widespread vaccine," then just own up to it.  At least then we'll know where you prioritize educating kids in person.

Fundamentally, I disagree with the notion that "it's hopeless" - which is what so many articles on this topic insinuate.  No answers, proposed solutions, just more alarmism/doomsdayism.  Menlo does not believe that in-school education is hopeless; neither does Woodside Priory . . . to name two high schools on the Peninsula that I believe are planning to have kids on campus this fall.

So once again, the elites/well-to-do get the benefits and the masses are trailing.  Twas ever thus, I suppose.

Jeez Teejers, we never agree this much on football!!!  :). 100% Agree. And the effects for poor kids is going to be devastating.

[lex24]

If all their kids have already got covid, no reason schools can't open.

*envision guy tapping head meme here*

I'll re-ask the question here I did in another thread which also rejected out of hand the notion of re-opening schools based on, primarily, adult safety (teachers/staff/parents):

when will "science" say it's safe enough to re-open schools?

Until there is a vaccine, there will ALWAYS be increased risk for teachers when schools re-open and a bunch of kids are running around.  I don't object to highlighting risks and advocating for teacher safety.

What I object to is the "throw up your hands, it's hopeless" approach.  Don't just say "it's not safe," unless you're prepared to indicate what would make it sufficiently safe.  How about efforts to minimize risk on campus?  And if your belief is "no school until widespread vaccine," then just own up to it.  At least then we'll know where you prioritize educating kids in person.

Fundamentally, I disagree with the notion that "it's hopeless" - which is what so many articles on this topic insinuate.  No answers, proposed solutions, just more alarmism/doomsdayism.  Menlo does not believe that in-school education is hopeless; neither does Woodside Priory . . . to name two high schools on the Peninsula that I believe are planning to have kids on campus this fall.

So once again, the elites/well-to-do get the benefits and the masses are trailing.  Twas ever thus, I suppose.

Jeez Teejers, we never agree this much on football!!!  :). 100% Agree. And the effects for poor kids is going to be devastating.

[dabigv13]

As pointed out by BC and stupac, I truly doubt this means 31% of the Florida children actually have covid. If they did, that would actually probably be good news, since while Miami's ICUs are starting to fill up, the number of deaths they have divided by a third of Florida's population implies a tiny IFR.

You don't order a coronavirus test on a kid unless they're sick, or they have known exposures. Testing kids is a bit of PITA. I doubt many asymptomatic or kids with sniffles are included in the denominator here. 31% positivity in any population subgroup certainly is indicative of an uncontrolled outbreak in Florida though. 

The thing with schools, is it seems in areas with low coronavirus prevalence, they may be able to function pretty safely. That is not most of the US right now. So the simple answer is science will say opening schools is safe when our overall coronavirus numbers are more like Europe or most of Asia than they are now. And then in a way that maximizes distance, ventilation, masks, and keeps class cohorts from mixing.

[dabigv13]

As pointed out by BC and stupac, I truly doubt this means 31% of the Florida children actually have covid. If they did, that would actually probably be good news, since while Miami's ICUs are starting to fill up, the number of deaths they have divided by a third of Florida's population implies a tiny IFR.

You don't order a coronavirus test on a kid unless they're sick, or they have known exposures. Testing kids is a bit of PITA. I doubt many asymptomatic or kids with sniffles are included in the denominator here. 31% positivity in any population subgroup certainly is indicative of an uncontrolled outbreak in Florida though. 

The thing with schools, is it seems in areas with low coronavirus prevalence, they may be able to function pretty safely. That is not most of the US right now. So the simple answer is science will say opening schools is safe when our overall coronavirus numbers are more like Europe or most of Asia than they are now. And then in a way that maximizes distance, ventilation, masks, and keeps class cohorts from mixing.

[teejers1]

Jeez Teejers, we never agree this much on football!!!  :). 100% Agree. And the effects for poor kids is going to be devastating.

That's because you (and many others) were blinded by Shaw's W/L record, especially early in his tenure - while I (and some others) saw program danger from near the jump with him (can you say "Fiesta?").  A combination of arrogance (thinking he is an O wizard), stubborness ("going into a shell with a lead has worked in the past, so it will always work"), and laziness (recruiting only "Stanford Men") is a bad - and perhaps lethal - combo for Stanford football.  Thank Buddha Shaw has the Stanford draw behind him because that sells itself, and the kids interested in Stanford can also better appreciate Shaw's positive characteristics - and he certainly has several of those, too.  [Good role model in general; represents university well in most settings; doesn't view his players' well-being through a football-only lens; to name a few].

I also don't buy your insistence that the only way Stanford can win big is with power running game.  

But we are getting WAY far afield of the Covid board, so I'll stop now.

[teejers1]

Jeez Teejers, we never agree this much on football!!!  :). 100% Agree. And the effects for poor kids is going to be devastating.

That's because you (and many others) were blinded by Shaw's W/L record, especially early in his tenure - while I (and some others) saw program danger from near the jump with him (can you say "Fiesta?").  A combination of arrogance (thinking he is an O wizard), stubborness ("going into a shell with a lead has worked in the past, so it will always work"), and laziness (recruiting only "Stanford Men") is a bad - and perhaps lethal - combo for Stanford football.  Thank Buddha Shaw has the Stanford draw behind him because that sells itself, and the kids interested in Stanford can also better appreciate Shaw's positive characteristics - and he certainly has several of those, too.  [Good role model in general; represents university well in most settings; doesn't view his players' well-being through a football-only lens; to name a few].

I also don't buy your insistence that the only way Stanford can win big is with power running game.  

But we are getting WAY far afield of the Covid board, so I'll stop now.

[M T]

Fundamentally, I disagree with the notion that "it's hopeless" - which is what so many articles on this topic insinuate.  No answers, proposed solutions, just more alarmism/doomsdayism.  Menlo does not believe that in-school education is hopeless; neither does Woodside Priory . . . to name two high schools on the Peninsula that I believe are planning to have kids on campus this fall.

I interpret those schools' position as believing it is hopeless to control the outbreak, so go Swedish.   (Surely they can't continue to claim that kids don't get the disease.  After all, since it is a PITA to test them, we must know they aren't getting it.)  More infection now is the price to pay for getting kids out of the house.

=======

As for the OP link, the link indicated that 31% of all kids tested were positive.
The COVID data for Florida indicate that there are 10,813 cases of 5-14yo.  That's 3.5% of the total of 311,640 cases.

FL demographics indicate there are 1,127,362 5-14yo in the state, so that nearly 1% of them have tested positive.
FL total population is 18,379,601.  5-14yo represent 6.1% of the population.

If the testing of kids is as representative of the spread as the testing of the adults, that would suggest kids would be 57% as likely to get the disease as adults (considering the environments of both since March).

But, if the kids are under-tested, then that factor of 1.75x less likely to get the disease is an overestimate.

Anyone who thinks kids are not going to get the disease at school and then take it home needs to think again.

(Yeah, I hear them switching the argument to "Well, we don't know that adults can get it from kids."  Where have I heard that kind of positioning before?  CDC?)

[M T]

Fundamentally, I disagree with the notion that "it's hopeless" - which is what so many articles on this topic insinuate.  No answers, proposed solutions, just more alarmism/doomsdayism.  Menlo does not believe that in-school education is hopeless; neither does Woodside Priory . . . to name two high schools on the Peninsula that I believe are planning to have kids on campus this fall.

I interpret those schools' position as believing it is hopeless to control the outbreak, so go Swedish.   (Surely they can't continue to claim that kids don't get the disease.  After all, since it is a PITA to test them, we must know they aren't getting it.)  More infection now is the price to pay for getting kids out of the house.

=======

As for the OP link, the link indicated that 31% of all kids tested were positive.
The COVID data for Florida indicate that there are 10,813 cases of 5-14yo.  That's 3.5% of the total of 311,640 cases.

FL demographics indicate there are 1,127,362 5-14yo in the state, so that nearly 1% of them have tested positive.
FL total population is 18,379,601.  5-14yo represent 6.1% of the population.

If the testing of kids is as representative of the spread as the testing of the adults, that would suggest kids would be 57% as likely to get the disease as adults (considering the environments of both since March).

But, if the kids are under-tested, then that factor of 1.75x less likely to get the disease is an overestimate.

Anyone who thinks kids are not going to get the disease at school and then take it home needs to think again.

(Yeah, I hear them switching the argument to "Well, we don't know that adults can get it from kids."  Where have I heard that kind of positioning before?  CDC?)

[lex24]

Jeez Teejers, we never agree this much on football!!!  :). 100% Agree. And the effects for poor kids is going to be devastating.

That's because you (and many others) were blinded by Shaw's W/L record, especially early in his tenure - while I (and some others) saw program danger from near the jump with him (can you say "Fiesta?").  A combination of arrogance (thinking he is an O wizard), stubborness ("going into a shell with a lead has worked in the past, so it will always work"), and laziness (recruiting only "Stanford Men") is a bad - and perhaps lethal - combo for Stanford football.  Thank Buddha Shaw has the Stanford draw behind him because that sells itself, and the kids interested in Stanford can also better appreciate Shaw's positive characteristics - and he certainly has several of those, too.  [Good role model in general; represents university well in most settings; doesn't view his players' well-being through a football-only lens; to name a few].

I also don't buy your insistence that the only way Stanford can win big is with power running game.  

But we are getting WAY far afield of the Covid board, so I'll stop now.

Teejers, I was trying to infect some levity on a board that desperately needs it.  My wish is that you and I will have the opportunity to argue about Shaw again.  Wouldn’t that be fun!

[lex24]

Jeez Teejers, we never agree this much on football!!!  :). 100% Agree. And the effects for poor kids is going to be devastating.

That's because you (and many others) were blinded by Shaw's W/L record, especially early in his tenure - while I (and some others) saw program danger from near the jump with him (can you say "Fiesta?").  A combination of arrogance (thinking he is an O wizard), stubborness ("going into a shell with a lead has worked in the past, so it will always work"), and laziness (recruiting only "Stanford Men") is a bad - and perhaps lethal - combo for Stanford football.  Thank Buddha Shaw has the Stanford draw behind him because that sells itself, and the kids interested in Stanford can also better appreciate Shaw's positive characteristics - and he certainly has several of those, too.  [Good role model in general; represents university well in most settings; doesn't view his players' well-being through a football-only lens; to name a few].

I also don't buy your insistence that the only way Stanford can win big is with power running game.  

But we are getting WAY far afield of the Covid board, so I'll stop now.

Teejers, I was trying to infect some levity on a board that desperately needs it.  My wish is that you and I will have the opportunity to argue about Shaw again.  Wouldn’t that be fun!

[M T]

Hey, enough of this football talk.  Terry rule?    (;-)

[M T]

Hey, enough of this football talk.  Terry rule?    (;-)

[OutsiderFan]

The story linked below suggests the Florida numbers for kids are very reasonable. 

It's so damn frustrating to see my suggestions, adopted by Italy, delivering such amazing results. July 16: USA +76,554 Italy +230.  So as Italy takes smart surveillance actions, we continue with our brain-dead "you can only get tested if you show symptoms or were around someone who tested positive" nonsense, and no national tracking app. Sigh.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/italy-find...itter_page

[OutsiderFan]

The story linked below suggests the Florida numbers for kids are very reasonable. 

It's so damn frustrating to see my suggestions, adopted by Italy, delivering such amazing results. July 16: USA +76,554 Italy +230.  So as Italy takes smart surveillance actions, we continue with our brain-dead "you can only get tested if you show symptoms or were around someone who tested positive" nonsense, and no national tracking app. Sigh.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/italy-find...itter_page