[magnus]

Many on here already believe that children are just as contagious as adults even though kids may not be nearly as symptomatic. 

The following preprint supports this belief. 

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/alexandraphelan/status/1255561071450042368?s=20[/tweet]

Fortunately (if this is true) the school year is nearly over for most states.  Otherwise the strong urge to reopen schools might overwhelm the folks preaching caution and cause the next wave.

[magnus]

Many on here already believe that children are just as contagious as adults even though kids may not be nearly as symptomatic. 

The following preprint supports this belief. 

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/alexandraphelan/status/1255561071450042368?s=20[/tweet]

Fortunately (if this is true) the school year is nearly over for most states.  Otherwise the strong urge to reopen schools might overwhelm the folks preaching caution and cause the next wave.

[Snorlax94]

This is a big question for my household, because I want my kids to go to school when it is safe, I want my schools to make things safer (no PE, staggered arrivals, increased spacing, outdoor seating when possible, etc), but I don’t want schools to reopen if it is unsafe.

I think the paper is much more circumspect in its results than the tweeted summary.

If the case numbers are contained with ample testing and tracing this fall, with another 4 months of learning to create safer environments, I still suspect we may be able to open primary schools in a modified format in the Bay Area in the fall.

The authors say
“The viral loads observed in the present study, combined with earlier findings of similar attack rate between children and adults (2 ) , suggest that transmission potential in schools and kindergartens should be evaluated using the same assumptions of infectivity as for adults. There are reasons to argue against the notion of adult-like infectivity in children, such as the fact that asymptomatic children do not spread the virus by coughing, and have smaller exhaled air volume than adults. However, there are other arguments that speak in favour of transmission, such as the greater physical activity and closer social engagement of children. We recommend collecting and evaluating more viral load data from testing laboratories to achieve more robust statistical assessments and independent confirmation of the present results. Based on the absence of any statistical evidence for a different viral load profile in children found in the present study, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation, with a widely susceptible population and the necessity to keep transmission rates low via non-pharmaceutical interventions. Children may be as infectious as adults.”

[Snorlax94]

This is a big question for my household, because I want my kids to go to school when it is safe, I want my schools to make things safer (no PE, staggered arrivals, increased spacing, outdoor seating when possible, etc), but I don’t want schools to reopen if it is unsafe.

I think the paper is much more circumspect in its results than the tweeted summary.

If the case numbers are contained with ample testing and tracing this fall, with another 4 months of learning to create safer environments, I still suspect we may be able to open primary schools in a modified format in the Bay Area in the fall.

The authors say
“The viral loads observed in the present study, combined with earlier findings of similar attack rate between children and adults (2 ) , suggest that transmission potential in schools and kindergartens should be evaluated using the same assumptions of infectivity as for adults. There are reasons to argue against the notion of adult-like infectivity in children, such as the fact that asymptomatic children do not spread the virus by coughing, and have smaller exhaled air volume than adults. However, there are other arguments that speak in favour of transmission, such as the greater physical activity and closer social engagement of children. We recommend collecting and evaluating more viral load data from testing laboratories to achieve more robust statistical assessments and independent confirmation of the present results. Based on the absence of any statistical evidence for a different viral load profile in children found in the present study, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation, with a widely susceptible population and the necessity to keep transmission rates low via non-pharmaceutical interventions. Children may be as infectious as adults.”

[akiddoc]

This is a big question for my household, because I want my kids to go to school when it is safe, I want my schools to make things safer (no PE, staggered arrivals, increased spacing, outdoor seating when possible, etc), but I don’t want schools to reopen if it is unsafe.

I think the paper is much more circumspect in its results than the tweeted summary.

If the case numbers are contained with ample testing and tracing this fall, with another 4 months of learning to create safer environments, I still suspect we may be able to open primary schools in a modified format in the Bay Area in the fall.

The authors say
“The viral loads observed in the present study, combined with earlier findings of similar attack rate between children and adults (2 ) , suggest that transmission potential in schools and kindergartens should be evaluated using the same assumptions of infectivity as for adults. There are reasons to argue against the notion of adult-like infectivity in children, such as the fact that asymptomatic children do not spread the virus by coughing, and have smaller exhaled air volume than adults. However, there are other arguments that speak in favour of transmission, such as the greater physical activity and closer social engagement of children. We recommend collecting and evaluating more viral load data from testing laboratories to achieve more robust statistical assessments and independent confirmation of the present results. Based on the absence of any statistical evidence for a different viral load profile in children found in the present study, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation, with a widely susceptible population and the necessity to keep transmission rates low via non-pharmaceutical interventions. Children may be as infectious as adults.”

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

[akiddoc]

This is a big question for my household, because I want my kids to go to school when it is safe, I want my schools to make things safer (no PE, staggered arrivals, increased spacing, outdoor seating when possible, etc), but I don’t want schools to reopen if it is unsafe.

I think the paper is much more circumspect in its results than the tweeted summary.

If the case numbers are contained with ample testing and tracing this fall, with another 4 months of learning to create safer environments, I still suspect we may be able to open primary schools in a modified format in the Bay Area in the fall.

The authors say
“The viral loads observed in the present study, combined with earlier findings of similar attack rate between children and adults (2 ) , suggest that transmission potential in schools and kindergartens should be evaluated using the same assumptions of infectivity as for adults. There are reasons to argue against the notion of adult-like infectivity in children, such as the fact that asymptomatic children do not spread the virus by coughing, and have smaller exhaled air volume than adults. However, there are other arguments that speak in favour of transmission, such as the greater physical activity and closer social engagement of children. We recommend collecting and evaluating more viral load data from testing laboratories to achieve more robust statistical assessments and independent confirmation of the present results. Based on the absence of any statistical evidence for a different viral load profile in children found in the present study, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation, with a widely susceptible population and the necessity to keep transmission rates low via non-pharmaceutical interventions. Children may be as infectious as adults.”

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

[Snorlax94]

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

Or at least modified PE. At my children’s school, some of the PE is indoors, and much of the PE involves learning sports with close contact, including soccer and basketball. On rainy days, PE could involve dozens of kids huffing and puffing close to each other in an indoor gym.

Anyway, during the entire shelter in place, daycare facilities have been available for essential workers, and it looks like that could be expanding soon to summer camps for the expanded list of essential workers (soon to include construction workers), so presumably we will learn more the extent to which summer camps and kids are spreading covid in the bay area.

As for being impossible, it’s being done:
https://youtu.be/wmK9Bt1xcnY

[Snorlax94]

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

Or at least modified PE. At my children’s school, some of the PE is indoors, and much of the PE involves learning sports with close contact, including soccer and basketball. On rainy days, PE could involve dozens of kids huffing and puffing close to each other in an indoor gym.

Anyway, during the entire shelter in place, daycare facilities have been available for essential workers, and it looks like that could be expanding soon to summer camps for the expanded list of essential workers (soon to include construction workers), so presumably we will learn more the extent to which summer camps and kids are spreading covid in the bay area.

As for being impossible, it’s being done:
https://youtu.be/wmK9Bt1xcnY

[M T]

In that video, of the assembly, it appears that a little less than half the kids are wearing a mask, and they are shoulder to shoulder.  At 0:52, you can see a girl apparently cough or sneeze into her elbow, and then wipe her nose with her hand.

Normal kid behavior, yes.   A real Petri dish though.

Maybe it is being done, but if there's COVID-19 in the community, I don't think this would be doing it without high rates of transmission among the children.  The video is from Taiwan which (currently; I don't know when the video was made) has had 1/5 the positive cases of Santa Clara County despite being 11x more populous, so a density of cases about 2% that of SCC.

[M T]

In that video, of the assembly, it appears that a little less than half the kids are wearing a mask, and they are shoulder to shoulder.  At 0:52, you can see a girl apparently cough or sneeze into her elbow, and then wipe her nose with her hand.

Normal kid behavior, yes.   A real Petri dish though.

Maybe it is being done, but if there's COVID-19 in the community, I don't think this would be doing it without high rates of transmission among the children.  The video is from Taiwan which (currently; I don't know when the video was made) has had 1/5 the positive cases of Santa Clara County despite being 11x more populous, so a density of cases about 2% that of SCC.

[Mick]

My wife taught grade school in Palo Alto Unified.  Every September, we'd have a little infection, courtesy of the little rascals.  Those classrooms are indeed petri dishes.

[Mick]

My wife taught grade school in Palo Alto Unified.  Every September, we'd have a little infection, courtesy of the little rascals.  Those classrooms are indeed petri dishes.

[Goose]

The video is from Taiwan which (currently; I don't know when the video was made) has had 1/5 the positive cases of Santa Clara County despite being 11x more populous, so a density of cases about 2% that of SCC.

Taiwan is pulling "the dance" off by keeping a lid on cases. If a case pops up somewhere, everybody gets quarantined. Right now they have three "hot spots" they are following. Small numbers. However, they know that if the disease gets into the community they are just as doomed as we were. That is why they are working like mad to make sure that doesn't happen.

[Goose]

The video is from Taiwan which (currently; I don't know when the video was made) has had 1/5 the positive cases of Santa Clara County despite being 11x more populous, so a density of cases about 2% that of SCC.

Taiwan is pulling "the dance" off by keeping a lid on cases. If a case pops up somewhere, everybody gets quarantined. Right now they have three "hot spots" they are following. Small numbers. However, they know that if the disease gets into the community they are just as doomed as we were. That is why they are working like mad to make sure that doesn't happen.

[akiddoc]

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

Or at least modified PE. At my children’s school, some of the PE is indoors, and much of the PE involves learning sports with close contact, including soccer and basketball. On rainy days, PE could involve dozens of kids huffing and puffing close to each other in an indoor gym.

Anyway, during the entire shelter in place, daycare facilities have been available for essential workers, and it looks like that could be expanding soon to summer camps for the expanded list of essential workers (soon to include construction workers), so presumably we will learn more the extent to which summer camps and kids are spreading covid in the bay area.

As for being impossible, it’s being done:
https://youtu.be/wmK9Bt1xcnY

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

[akiddoc]

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

Or at least modified PE. At my children’s school, some of the PE is indoors, and much of the PE involves learning sports with close contact, including soccer and basketball. On rainy days, PE could involve dozens of kids huffing and puffing close to each other in an indoor gym.

Anyway, during the entire shelter in place, daycare facilities have been available for essential workers, and it looks like that could be expanding soon to summer camps for the expanded list of essential workers (soon to include construction workers), so presumably we will learn more the extent to which summer camps and kids are spreading covid in the bay area.

As for being impossible, it’s being done:
https://youtu.be/wmK9Bt1xcnY

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

[stupac2]

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

What is that number based on? If each pupil has a 1% chance to be infected at any given time (which is likely high since we're looking at 1% total incidence over the last few months) the odds of a classroom having one infection are like 23%. That's of course assuming an independent variable which isn't true (since a kid is probably most likely to get it from another kid), but if anything that makes the percentage lower because of clustering (assuming you follow guidelines like CA's current ones, with no classroom mixing and dedicated teachers).

I fully believe that my simple math could be missing something brobdingnagian, but to get to 99% you'd need something like 15% incidence, just something wildly unlikely.

[stupac2]

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

What is that number based on? If each pupil has a 1% chance to be infected at any given time (which is likely high since we're looking at 1% total incidence over the last few months) the odds of a classroom having one infection are like 23%. That's of course assuming an independent variable which isn't true (since a kid is probably most likely to get it from another kid), but if anything that makes the percentage lower because of clustering (assuming you follow guidelines like CA's current ones, with no classroom mixing and dedicated teachers).

I fully believe that my simple math could be missing something brobdingnagian, but to get to 99% you'd need something like 15% incidence, just something wildly unlikely.

[JustAnotherFan]

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

Or at least modified PE. At my children’s school, some of the PE is indoors, and much of the PE involves learning sports with close contact, including soccer and basketball. On rainy days, PE could involve dozens of kids huffing and puffing close to each other in an indoor gym.

Anyway, during the entire shelter in place, daycare facilities have been available for essential workers, and it looks like that could be expanding soon to summer camps for the expanded list of essential workers (soon to include construction workers), so presumably we will learn more the extent to which summer camps and kids are spreading covid in the bay area.

As for being impossible, it’s being done:
https://youtu.be/wmK9Bt1xcnY

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

Akiddoc, do you have a link to that study on US elementary school kids? I would really appreciate looking at it.

[JustAnotherFan]

What makes you think PE is an issue? Being outside will lower transmission vs being inside. "Spacing" in young children is doomed to failure. Whether inside or out, little kids like to touch. No amount of cajoling from adults is going to stop it. You would have to build prison like enclosures in every classroom to enforce that.

Or at least modified PE. At my children’s school, some of the PE is indoors, and much of the PE involves learning sports with close contact, including soccer and basketball. On rainy days, PE could involve dozens of kids huffing and puffing close to each other in an indoor gym.

Anyway, during the entire shelter in place, daycare facilities have been available for essential workers, and it looks like that could be expanding soon to summer camps for the expanded list of essential workers (soon to include construction workers), so presumably we will learn more the extent to which summer camps and kids are spreading covid in the bay area.

As for being impossible, it’s being done:
https://youtu.be/wmK9Bt1xcnY

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

Akiddoc, do you have a link to that study on US elementary school kids? I would really appreciate looking at it.

[burger]

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

What is that number based on? If each pupil has a 1% chance to be infected at any given time (which is likely high since we're looking at 1% total incidence over the last few months) the odds of a classroom having one infection are like 23%. That's of course assuming an independent variable which isn't true (since a kid is probably most likely to get it from another kid), but if anything that makes the percentage lower because of clustering (assuming you follow guidelines like CA's current ones, with no classroom mixing and dedicated teachers).

I fully believe that my simple math could be missing something of immense proportions, but to get to 99% you'd need something like 15% incidence, just something wildly unlikely.

I can't speak for Akiddoc, but that study of the Korean call center is probably informative here . Dozens of people got the virus in a shared office, and iirc bathrooms were hypothesized to be involved in the spread.  Classrooms are way smaller, and kids are bad at hygiene.  The 6' spacing thing may protect you when passing someone on the street, but being 6' apart is probably meaningless when you are talking about 30+ hours a week of it.

I think it's essentially impossible to keep the virus from spreading in a classroom.

[burger]

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

What is that number based on? If each pupil has a 1% chance to be infected at any given time (which is likely high since we're looking at 1% total incidence over the last few months) the odds of a classroom having one infection are like 23%. That's of course assuming an independent variable which isn't true (since a kid is probably most likely to get it from another kid), but if anything that makes the percentage lower because of clustering (assuming you follow guidelines like CA's current ones, with no classroom mixing and dedicated teachers).

I fully believe that my simple math could be missing something of immense proportions, but to get to 99% you'd need something like 15% incidence, just something wildly unlikely.

I can't speak for Akiddoc, but that study of the Korean call center is probably informative here . Dozens of people got the virus in a shared office, and iirc bathrooms were hypothesized to be involved in the spread.  Classrooms are way smaller, and kids are bad at hygiene.  The 6' spacing thing may protect you when passing someone on the street, but being 6' apart is probably meaningless when you are talking about 30+ hours a week of it.

I think it's essentially impossible to keep the virus from spreading in a classroom.

[stupac2]

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

What is that number based on? If each pupil has a 1% chance to be infected at any given time (which is likely high since we're looking at 1% total incidence over the last few months) the odds of a classroom having one infection are like 23%. That's of course assuming an independent variable which isn't true (since a kid is probably most likely to get it from another kid), but if anything that makes the percentage lower because of clustering (assuming you follow guidelines like CA's current ones, with no classroom mixing and dedicated teachers).

I fully believe that my simple math could be missing something of immense proportions, but to get to 99% you'd need something like 15% incidence, just something wildly unlikely.

I can't speak for Akiddoc, but that study of the Korean call center is probably informative here . Dozens of people got the virus in a shared office, and iirc bathrooms were hypothesized to be involved in the spread.  Classrooms are way smaller, and kids are bad at hygiene.  The 6' spacing thing may protect you when passing someone on the street, but being 6' apart is probably meaningless when you are talking about 30+ hours a week of it.

I think it's essentially impossible to keep the virus from spreading in a classroom.

Actually, I see now that I misread, the study wasn't covid-specific, it was just that virtually every classroom in America has a kid sick with something at any given time. Now that's a finding I believe. Although I'm not sure how informative it is for our current situation, where the incidence of covid is a lot smaller than "all the other viruses".

[stupac2]

If only one kid in that classroom gets C-19, at least 50% will have it within days. In viral load studies on children in elementary schools in the USA, there was about a 99% chance of at least one kid with a viral infection in the classroom every day of the school year if there were 25 pupils . Taiwan isn't achieving anything at the elementary school level. All of the prevention is happening elsewhere.

What is that number based on? If each pupil has a 1% chance to be infected at any given time (which is likely high since we're looking at 1% total incidence over the last few months) the odds of a classroom having one infection are like 23%. That's of course assuming an independent variable which isn't true (since a kid is probably most likely to get it from another kid), but if anything that makes the percentage lower because of clustering (assuming you follow guidelines like CA's current ones, with no classroom mixing and dedicated teachers).

I fully believe that my simple math could be missing something of immense proportions, but to get to 99% you'd need something like 15% incidence, just something wildly unlikely.

I can't speak for Akiddoc, but that study of the Korean call center is probably informative here . Dozens of people got the virus in a shared office, and iirc bathrooms were hypothesized to be involved in the spread.  Classrooms are way smaller, and kids are bad at hygiene.  The 6' spacing thing may protect you when passing someone on the street, but being 6' apart is probably meaningless when you are talking about 30+ hours a week of it.

I think it's essentially impossible to keep the virus from spreading in a classroom.

Actually, I see now that I misread, the study wasn't covid-specific, it was just that virtually every classroom in America has a kid sick with something at any given time. Now that's a finding I believe. Although I'm not sure how informative it is for our current situation, where the incidence of covid is a lot smaller than "all the other viruses".

[Goose]

The approach Taiwan has used involves keeping the virus out of the community. They basically sealed the country. You can come in, but you get a mandatory two week strict quarantine. They rigorously stamp out any cases in the country by massive quarantine. The latest "hot spot" they have is in their Navy, and they have traced the heck out of every sailor who could possibly have it. They can keep their schools open because they know that right now none of the kids have it. If that changes, all bets are off.

Taiwan realizes their solution is inherently fragile. If the virus gets a significant foothold anywhere in the country they will be in the same boat with the rest of us. That is why they are trying so hard to make sure that doesn't happen. Korea is doing the same. That one patient who went to many church services while officially in the hospital almost blew it for them. It was touch and go. Fortunately for them, they were able to contain the spread.

[Goose]

The approach Taiwan has used involves keeping the virus out of the community. They basically sealed the country. You can come in, but you get a mandatory two week strict quarantine. They rigorously stamp out any cases in the country by massive quarantine. The latest "hot spot" they have is in their Navy, and they have traced the heck out of every sailor who could possibly have it. They can keep their schools open because they know that right now none of the kids have it. If that changes, all bets are off.

Taiwan realizes their solution is inherently fragile. If the virus gets a significant foothold anywhere in the country they will be in the same boat with the rest of us. That is why they are trying so hard to make sure that doesn't happen. Korea is doing the same. That one patient who went to many church services while officially in the hospital almost blew it for them. It was touch and go. Fortunately for them, they were able to contain the spread.

[BrevinsBest]

Schools may reopen, but they are going to have to be structured differently. My sister is a middle school teacher, and she mentioned that rooms just aren't set up to have students constantly washing their hands. I think some classrooms don't even have sinks. 

In our area, there's been talk about drastically reducing class size and maybe having different waves of students throughout the week. There is so much to be figured out before school restarts and I have a hard time believing school may start in July.

[BrevinsBest]

Schools may reopen, but they are going to have to be structured differently. My sister is a middle school teacher, and she mentioned that rooms just aren't set up to have students constantly washing their hands. I think some classrooms don't even have sinks. 

In our area, there's been talk about drastically reducing class size and maybe having different waves of students throughout the week. There is so much to be figured out before school restarts and I have a hard time believing school may start in July.

[BostonCard]

Yeah, I could see a situation where the class is divided in two (even/odd days) where half the class goes in person and the other half watches the teacher via Zoom or something like that to limit the number of pupils in a classroom at a given time.

BC

[BostonCard]

Yeah, I could see a situation where the class is divided in two (even/odd days) where half the class goes in person and the other half watches the teacher via Zoom or something like that to limit the number of pupils in a classroom at a given time.

BC

[burger]

Schools may reopen, but they are going to have to be structured differently. My sister is a middle school teacher, and she mentioned that rooms just aren't set up to have students constantly washing their hands. I think some classrooms don't even have sinks. 

In our area, there's been talk about drastically reducing class size and maybe having different waves of students throughout the week. There is so much to be figured out before school restarts and I have a hard time believing school may start in July.

I don't see how washing hands a lot helps much.  The virus spreads by aerosols, and in a (relatively) small room like a classroom, that's going to be a big problem.

And even if you split up classes, what about the teachers?  Is it fair to ask teachers to potentially expose themselves to kids with the virus?  Plenty of teachers are older.  You simply can't protect a teacher spending several hours a day in a smallish room with potentially asymptomatic carriers.  They can't wear N95 masks all day and teach. 

Sending kids back to school before a very thorough testing program is in place (i.e. not soon) is going to be a death sentence for a small percentage of teachers.  I don't think it's fair to ask them to do that, even if there are negative consequences for parents and for the kids' educations.

[burger]

Schools may reopen, but they are going to have to be structured differently. My sister is a middle school teacher, and she mentioned that rooms just aren't set up to have students constantly washing their hands. I think some classrooms don't even have sinks. 

In our area, there's been talk about drastically reducing class size and maybe having different waves of students throughout the week. There is so much to be figured out before school restarts and I have a hard time believing school may start in July.

I don't see how washing hands a lot helps much.  The virus spreads by aerosols, and in a (relatively) small room like a classroom, that's going to be a big problem.

And even if you split up classes, what about the teachers?  Is it fair to ask teachers to potentially expose themselves to kids with the virus?  Plenty of teachers are older.  You simply can't protect a teacher spending several hours a day in a smallish room with potentially asymptomatic carriers.  They can't wear N95 masks all day and teach. 

Sending kids back to school before a very thorough testing program is in place (i.e. not soon) is going to be a death sentence for a small percentage of teachers.  I don't think it's fair to ask them to do that, even if there are negative consequences for parents and for the kids' educations.

[stupac2]

I don't see how washing hands a lot helps much.  The virus spreads by aerosols, and in a (relatively) small room like a classroom, that's going to be a big problem.

Suddenly the solution is clear: turn classrooms into wind tunnels!

[stupac2]

I don't see how washing hands a lot helps much.  The virus spreads by aerosols, and in a (relatively) small room like a classroom, that's going to be a big problem.

Suddenly the solution is clear: turn classrooms into wind tunnels!

[BostonCard]

I don't see how washing hands a lot helps much.  The virus spreads by aerosols, and in a (relatively) small room like a classroom, that's going to be a big problem.

I don't think it is generally true that the virus spreads by aerosols.
CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nco...tsheet.pdf

• You can become infected by coming into close contact (about 6 feet or twoarm lengths) with a person who has COVID-19. COVID-19 is primarily spread from person to person.
• You can become infected from respiratory droplets when an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks.
• You may also be able to get it by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it, and then by touching your mouth, nose, or eyes.

WHO: https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail...onaviruses

How does COVID-19 spread?

People can catch COVID-19 from others who have the virus. The disease spreads primarily from person to person through small droplets from the nose or mouth, which are expelled when a person with COVID-19 coughs, sneezes, or speaks. These droplets are relatively heavy, do not travel far and quickly sink to the ground. People can catch COVID-19 if they breathe in these droplets from a person infected with the virus. This is why it is important to stay at least 1 metre (3 feet) away from others. These droplets can land on objects and surfaces around the person such as tables, doorknobs and handrails. People can become infected by touching these objects or surfaces, then touching their eyes, nose or mouth. This is why it is important to wash your hands regularly with soap and water or clean with alcohol-based hand rub.

WHO is assessing ongoing research on the ways that COVID-19 is spread and will continue to share updated findings.

I think the evidence is that the dominant mode of transmission is via droplets. While I don't think we can exclude aerosols entirely (and it has been established that in certain procedures, like intubation, aerosols are generated), it doesn't seem to be the dominant form of transmission.

BC

[BostonCard]

I don't see how washing hands a lot helps much.  The virus spreads by aerosols, and in a (relatively) small room like a classroom, that's going to be a big problem.

I don't think it is generally true that the virus spreads by aerosols.
CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nco...tsheet.pdf

• You can become infected by coming into close contact (about 6 feet or twoarm lengths) with a person who has COVID-19. COVID-19 is primarily spread from person to person.
• You can become infected from respiratory droplets when an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks.
• You may also be able to get it by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it, and then by touching your mouth, nose, or eyes.

WHO: https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail...onaviruses

How does COVID-19 spread?

People can catch COVID-19 from others who have the virus. The disease spreads primarily from person to person through small droplets from the nose or mouth, which are expelled when a person with COVID-19 coughs, sneezes, or speaks. These droplets are relatively heavy, do not travel far and quickly sink to the ground. People can catch COVID-19 if they breathe in these droplets from a person infected with the virus. This is why it is important to stay at least 1 metre (3 feet) away from others. These droplets can land on objects and surfaces around the person such as tables, doorknobs and handrails. People can become infected by touching these objects or surfaces, then touching their eyes, nose or mouth. This is why it is important to wash your hands regularly with soap and water or clean with alcohol-based hand rub.

WHO is assessing ongoing research on the ways that COVID-19 is spread and will continue to share updated findings.

I think the evidence is that the dominant mode of transmission is via droplets. While I don't think we can exclude aerosols entirely (and it has been established that in certain procedures, like intubation, aerosols are generated), it doesn't seem to be the dominant form of transmission.

BC

[Snorlax94]

Sending kids back to school before a very thorough testing program is in place (i.e. not soon) is going to be a death sentence for a small percentage of teachers.  I don't think it's fair to ask them to do that, even if there are negative consequences for parents and for the kids' educations.

Yeah, I agree, but I think the question is, where will we be?

About a month ago, CA was testing about 3,000 people a day, then it got to 12,000, and recently they've hit their goal of about 25,000 a day by the end of April.

My hope is by the end of July we'll be testing over 100,000 a day, maybe a lot more than that. My hope is that by July the "army of contact tracers" the state and cities are planning will be significantly operational. Plus there are all the modifications people have listed (Re: protecting teachers, every teacher we've had has been under 50, but my district has announced it will take steps to protect anyone in a vulnerable group.), and all the best practices we'll learn each month.

I certainly don't think we're anywhere close to opening schools now, but I want to see where we are in August. I am just hopeful we can get in a much better place by then. 

[Snorlax94]

Sending kids back to school before a very thorough testing program is in place (i.e. not soon) is going to be a death sentence for a small percentage of teachers.  I don't think it's fair to ask them to do that, even if there are negative consequences for parents and for the kids' educations.

Yeah, I agree, but I think the question is, where will we be?

About a month ago, CA was testing about 3,000 people a day, then it got to 12,000, and recently they've hit their goal of about 25,000 a day by the end of April.

My hope is by the end of July we'll be testing over 100,000 a day, maybe a lot more than that. My hope is that by July the "army of contact tracers" the state and cities are planning will be significantly operational. Plus there are all the modifications people have listed (Re: protecting teachers, every teacher we've had has been under 50, but my district has announced it will take steps to protect anyone in a vulnerable group.), and all the best practices we'll learn each month.

I certainly don't think we're anywhere close to opening schools now, but I want to see where we are in August. I am just hopeful we can get in a much better place by then. 

[Farm93]

Schools may reopen, but they are going to have to be structured differently. My sister is a middle school teacher, and she mentioned that rooms just aren't set up to have students constantly washing their hands. I think some classrooms don't even have sinks. 

In our area, there's been talk about drastically reducing class size and maybe having different waves of students throughout the week. There is so much to be figured out before school restarts and I have a hard time believing school may start in July.

I doubt July will happen because of union rules for the teachers and the potential of absenteeism for students and teachers.

However, starting in July would be best if one believes the students will be on a rotation plan getting only a couple of days in class each week or if a school district suspects there will be at least a few multi-day COVID closures during the year for cleaning.

Early starts won't happen, but I can see several benefits to starting early if it was logistically possible.

[Farm93]

Schools may reopen, but they are going to have to be structured differently. My sister is a middle school teacher, and she mentioned that rooms just aren't set up to have students constantly washing their hands. I think some classrooms don't even have sinks. 

In our area, there's been talk about drastically reducing class size and maybe having different waves of students throughout the week. There is so much to be figured out before school restarts and I have a hard time believing school may start in July.

I doubt July will happen because of union rules for the teachers and the potential of absenteeism for students and teachers.

However, starting in July would be best if one believes the students will be on a rotation plan getting only a couple of days in class each week or if a school district suspects there will be at least a few multi-day COVID closures during the year for cleaning.

Early starts won't happen, but I can see several benefits to starting early if it was logistically possible.