Schools closed until February? (part 3)

JimmyVik

School is finished for my brat today too.
No point taking any chances with the oldies and other peoples oldies.

Stateofyou

meeeeh wrote: »

It's funny that you still didn't manage to find any public health official that advised 7 days. All you managed is another tedious personal attack.

The fact is that those who are worried kids will catch something in schools and pass it on should already pull them out and isolate. For the rest extra two days will either mean sourcing child minding or extra opportunities for kids to socialise outside school (especially secondary school kids). Both make absolutely no sense and are of no benefit to anyone.

Edit: also could explain to me are false accusations and petty insults a show strength for you? What do you think are you achieving with posts like that? Do I make you angry and powerless? It's fascinating in a way how a grown up can loose all control.

If you would stop playing victim for one second and get up out of that armchair psychology chair you're sitting in, you might take in what is actually being said and repeatedly. There are some who are worried more than others, especially in light of family with underlying conditions and of course they will already take those extra precautions. Then there is rest of the country, who will keep their kids in school until they are supposed to close, and visit others over the Christmas period as per government guidelines. And it's those interactions, a million times over and especially considering those families with schooling children and staff which will almost certainly cause us to head into lockdown again in January. More economic and financial loss for people and of course some will be badly effected health wise and some will lose their lives.

meeeeh

Stateofyou wrote: »

If you would stop playing victim for one second and get up out of that armchair psychology chair you're sitting in, you might take in what is actually being said and repeatedly. There are some who are worried more than others, especially in light of family with underlying conditions and of course they will already take those extra precautions. Then there is rest of the country, who will keep their kids in school until they are supposed to close, and visit others over the Christmas period as per government guidelines. And it's those interactions, a million times over and especially considering those families with schooling children and staff which will almost certainly cause us to head into lockdown again in January. More economic and financial loss for people and of course some will be badly effected health wise and some will lose their lives.

If you want us not to o into lockdown after Christmas then we have to ban Christmas celebrations as they are suggesting in Uk and not Mickey Mouse nonsense of two extra days off school.

But since nobody wants tackle big stuff mickey mouse ideas will make no real difference or they could make the situation worse if kids socialise outside school those few days.

Oh and btw we are only only meeting one other family (4 people) outside our usual bubble over the holiday period. I'm pretty sure that will make a lot bigger difference than those who think extra 2 days of school will make the whole clan immune to Covid.

downthemiddle

HerrKuehn wrote: »

I agree it is a good idea for those who can to take the children out early. One thing I would suggest that schools not do is arrange things on the Monday and Tuesday that will make the kids want to attend.

You want the schools open but you don't want the children to attend. I've heard it all now.

downthemiddle

HerrKuehn wrote: »

Would this be implying Irish schools should be closed because Dutch schools are closing?

No.

HerrKuehn

downthemiddle wrote: »

You want the schools open but you don't want the children to attend. I've heard it all now.

No, I said it would be a good idea for those who can to keep their kids home. There will be some who would find it difficult to do so. I would guess only half the class or so will be in school on Monday.

the kelt

meeeeh wrote: »

If you want us not to o into lockdown after Christmas then we have to ban Christmas celebrations as they are suggesting in Uk and not Mickey Mouse nonsense of two extra days off school.

But since nobody wants tackle big stuff mickey mouse ideas will make no real difference or they could make the situation worse if kids socialise outside school those few days.

Oh and btw we are only only meeting one other family (4 people) outside our usual bubble over the holiday period. I'm pretty sure that will make a lot bigger difference than those who think extra 2 days of school will make the whole clan immune to Covid.

Basically you would prefer to see Christmas cancelled than have teachers off a few days early, jaysus theres bitter and then theres....

HerrKuehn

the kelt wrote: »

Basically you would prefer to see Christmas cancelled than have teachers off a few days early, jaysus theres bitter and then theres....

I don't think anyone thinks that letting schools off 2 days early will make any difference to whether or not we will have a lockdown after xmas. It will depend more on how people socialise over xmas, new years parties etc

blanch152

Stateofyou wrote: »

If you would stop playing victim for one second and get up out of that armchair psychology chair you're sitting in, you might take in what is actually being said and repeatedly. There are some who are worried more than others, especially in light of family with underlying conditions and of course they will already take those extra precautions. Then there is rest of the country, who will keep their kids in school until they are supposed to close, and visit others over the Christmas period as per government guidelines. And it's those interactions, a million times over and especially considering those families with schooling children and staff which will almost certainly cause us to head into lockdown again in January. More economic and financial loss for people and of course some will be badly effected health wise and some will lose their lives.

Nothing to do with the schools.

In fact, as you say, it is the unstructured encounters outside of schools that will cause the virus to spread. The schools should be open as much as possible, as they are helping to keep the rate down.

the kelt

HerrKuehn wrote: »

I don't think anyone thinks that letting schools off 2 days early will make any difference to whether or not we will have a lockdown after xmas. It will depend more on how people socialise over xmas, new years parties etc

Why though?

Arent we told to reduce our contacts with others over the Christmas period? So if thast the case why would the same not apply to schools where classes of 30 or more all gathered together in a room in a lot of cases with no social distancing, masks etc?

Even one day less of people being in that situation helps. "reduce your contacst over the Xmas period" thats the mantra so how can a situation where thats possible not help?

Ive 2 kids in school today mixing with 60 other people, no masks etc, so them not being in that situation for even 2 days definitely wont make a difference?

Something isnt adding up here? is there some sort of shield around schools we dont know of where the virus acts differently?

I fond it curios how people advocate reducing contacts over christmas as the way to go unless its schools, doesnt compute!

KerryConnor

I want schools open as much as next person but the line of covid immunity in schools is illogical..

https://twitter.com/drzoehyde/status/1338456425102655488?s=24

blanch152 wrote: »

Nothing to do with the schools.

In fact, as you say, it is the unstructured encounters outside of schools that will cause the virus to spread. The schools should be open as much as possible, as they are helping to keep the rate down.

blanch152

meeeeh wrote: »

Well show me where is the advice for 7 days.

The lowest recommendation I saw is 5 days and PCR test if you have prior negative test. Close contacts have to self isolate 14 days, 10 days is from the date of positive test.

Those who want to can take kids out 2 days prior. However there is also naive belief that if all kids are home 2 days earlier they will isolate when it's just as likely they will socialise since home visits and whatever else will be allowed from 18th.

Btw people who are visiting vulnerable people for Christmas are advised to self isolate already.

If we close schools early and 10% of families ignore the advice to self-isolate instead, we will set off an explosion in the virus. Even 2-3% of families mixing immediately will cause a spike in numbers.

Far better that schools remain open and children are safer in the controlled environment.

HerrKuehn

the kelt wrote: »

Why though?

Arent we told to reduce our contacts with others over the Christmas period? So if thast the case why would the same not apply to schools where classes of 30 or more all gathered together in a room in a lot of cases with no social distancing, masks etc?

Even one day less of people being in that situation helps. "reduce your contacst over the Xmas period" thats the mantra so how can a situation where thats possible not help?

Ive 2 kids in school today mixing with 60 other people, no masks etc, so them not being in that situation for even 2 days definitely wont make a difference?

Something isnt adding up here? is there some sort of shield around schools we dont know of where the virus acts differently?

Sure, I mean there may be a marginal benefit to it. I would imagine there will be a much reduced number in the school on those days anyway, reducing the risk over a normal 2 days. We had reducing numbers of cases with schools fully open after the midterm, so they obviously aren't a major driver.

meeeeh

the kelt wrote: »

Basically you would prefer to see Christmas cancelled than have teachers off a few days early, jaysus theres bitter and then theres....

No I'm looking at things logically. One measure would make huge difference and the other one very little if any.

the kelt

meeeeh wrote: »

No I'm looking at things logically. One measure would make huge difference and the other one very little if any.

Logic really doesnt say that in all honesty.

Logic says both would make a difference but one results in teachers getting an extra 1.5 days off.

blanch152

KerryConnor wrote: »

I want schools open as much as next person but the line of covid immunity in schools is illogical..

https://twitter.com/drzoehyde/status/1338456425102655488?s=24

Never said that there was covid immunity in schools.

All I have said is that school situations are better overall for managing infection than children staying at home, playing on the streets, playdates, travelling to shopping centres in groups of teenagers, etc., all examples of the types of unstructured and uncontrolled social activities that lead to multiple infections.

blanch152

the kelt wrote: »

Why though?

Arent we told to reduce our contacts with others over the Christmas period? So if thast the case why would the same not apply to schools where classes of 30 or more all gathered together in a room in a lot of cases with no social distancing, masks etc?

Even one day less of people being in that situation helps. "reduce your contacst over the Xmas period" thats the mantra so how can a situation where thats possible not help?

Ive 2 kids in school today mixing with 60 other people, no masks etc, so them not being in that situation for even 2 days definitely wont make a difference?

Something isnt adding up here? is there some sort of shield around schools we dont know of where the virus acts differently?

I fond it curios how people advocate reducing contacts over christmas as the way to go unless its schools, doesnt compute!

Because when you close schools, children don't go home and self-isolate unless we are in full lockdown. Instead, children mix with each other in different situations that are more dangerous for spreading the virus.

Essentially, if you need to close schools, you need to impose a full lockdown.

meeeeh

the kelt wrote: »

Logic really doesnt say that in all honesty.

Logic says both would make a difference but one results in teachers getting an extra 1.5 days off.

No it doesn't. The most transmissions by far are in private homes.

the kelt

meeeeh wrote: »

No it doesn't. The most transmissions by far are in private homes.

Yes it does im not comparing rates.

Reducing contacts over the Xmas period makes a difference, period!

So all situations where you can reduce the chance of covid coming into a home makes a difference, such as sitting in a room with 30 unmasked others with no social distance for hours on end.

Beasty

meeeeh and Boggles - you are clearly incapable of debating in a civil manner here, so the pair of you are now threadbanned

Stateofyou

blanch152 wrote: »

Because when you close schools, children don't go home and self-isolate unless we are in full lockdown. Instead, children mix with each other in different situations that are more dangerous for spreading the virus.

Essentially, if you need to close schools, you need to impose a full lockdown.

That's very presumptuous. Our kids don't, and I don't know anyone else who ignores covid/government guidelines to let their kids run feral either.

the kelt

blanch152 wrote: »

Because when you close schools, children don't go home and self-isolate unless we are in full lockdown. Instead, children mix with each other in different situations that are more dangerous for spreading the virus.

Essentially, if you need to close schools, you need to impose a full lockdown.

You do know after schools and on weekends kids dont go home and isolate also.

Schools being closed doesnt mean that just happens all of a sudden. Just go into town after school any friday eve.

Lillyfae

the kelt wrote: »

You do know after schools and on weekends kids dont go home and isolate also.

Schools being closed doesnt mean that just happens all of a sudden. Just go into town after school any friday eve.

You're proving blanch's point here.

the kelt

Lillyfae wrote: »

You're proving blanch's point here.

Im not denying that kids socialise outside of school hours.

Im simply pointing out that this doesnt just become an issue if the schools are closed as is being implied.

Its happening anyway, only a fool would believe this happens only if schools close.

In fcat in most cases they socialise in lower numbers when schools close, take any rural town with 3 different secondary schools and kids coming from 10 different villages and parishes outside of the town all mixing and congregating in that town every day, meeting for buses, visiting shops, getting lunches.

Take away that option and at least most will keep their own areas as the option isnt there ie: less contacts,

So are we still claiming a situation say for secondary schools where hundreds of people are being bussed into one central town and visiting shops, cafes etc whilst moving out and about said town every day is ok and reducing that situation even for 2 days makes no difference and wouldnt help at all?

JDD

the kelt wrote: »

Im not denying that kids socialise outside of school hours.

Im simply pointing out that this doesnt just become an issue if the schools are closed as is being implied.

Its happening anyway, only a fool would believe this happens only if schools close.

In fcat in most cases they socialise in lower numbers when schools close, take any rural town with 3 different secondary schools and kids coming from 10 different villages and parishes outside of the town all mixing and congregating in that town every day, meeting for buses, visiting shops, getting lunches.

Take away that option and at least most will keep their own areas as the option isnt there ie: less contacts,

So are we still claiming a situation say for secondary schools where hundreds of people are being bussed into one central town and visiting shops, cafes etc whilst moving out and about said town every day is ok and reducing that situation even for 2 days makes no difference and wouldnt help at all?

That's probably a very good point in relation to rural areas.

Unfortunately urban areas tend to be the tinder paper in most large breakouts.

If all the secondary schools in Dublin closed tomorrow every shopping centre, coffee shop and takeaway would be packed. I was in Dundrum Town Centre last Friday afternoon and I could count at least ten different groups of kids in their school uniform - some groups with a number from different schools. Now that was just a couple of hours on a Friday evening. They'd spend all day in the place if the schools closed.

On balance though, would there be less outbreaks if they closed both the primary schools (where you have more control over where the kids go outside of school) and secondary schools across the country tomorrow? Probably. Yes there would probably be more outbreaks among urban secondary children but that would probably be outweighed by the reduced outbreaks in primary schools and rural areas.

awec

There was an argument to be made for moving the Christmas holidays to allow more time off before Christmas to allow for longer isolation before meeting families, with less time off afterwards.

Unfortunately they made it about getting extra time off work, and the public mood is one of utter weariness at the endless whinging of teachers.

Stateofyou

awec wrote: »

There was an argument to be made for moving the Christmas holidays to allow more time off before Christmas to allow for longer isolation before meeting families, with less time off afterwards.

Unfortunately they made it about getting extra time off work, and the public mood is one of utter weariness at the endless whinging of teachers.

In fairness I don't think whinging came from teachers themselves.

Lillyfae

Stateofyou wrote: »

In fairness I don't think whinging came from teachers themselves.

No, it came from the secretary of the TUI. But many of the teachers here touted it as a good idea nonetheless. The "optics" weren't well received.

Stateofyou

Lillyfae wrote: »

No, it came from the secretary (?) of the ASTI. But many of the teachers here touted it as a good idea nonetheless. The "optics" weren't well received.

So what, and more people than teachers here agreed it was a good idea. The point is the teachers weren't whinging.

Blondini

awec wrote: »

There was an argument to be made for moving the Christmas holidays to allow more time off before Christmas to allow for longer isolation before meeting families, with less time off afterwards.

Unfortunately they made it about getting extra time off work, and the public mood is one of utter weariness at the endless whinging of teachers.

Bizarre and ignorant statement.

Examples please? Now remember that you used the word "endless", so I expect this list of examples of whinging to be endless, or at the very least extremely extensive.

Hmmm?

Yeah, didn't think so.