Coronavirus (buying, schools, live)

[goodheathen]

I've posted articles multiple times about Long-Covid among teachers.

Also, until the summer break that's probably in effect almost everywhere, the virus was shutting down many schools.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ures-rcna27709

But the catch I just saw is that, as of a few months ago, California was doing much better in that sense compared to the entire country. Which I'm sure varies by CA school district. LAUSD hasn't done well. Call me biased, but I think LA is the most important county from the state's perspective.

That doesn't have much to do with the general Long-Covid threat, which there's no refuting (other than "I don't know anyone personally," which is embarrassingly anecdotal). Many people being chronically ill is bad for society.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Feel free to elaborate on this. Bonus if you can for once avoid using terms like "I think/I'm guessing/estimating/surmising/assuming", etc.

Possibly, perhaps, should, could, might have never been metrics and they are not measurable. Unless, of course, you have a crystal ball.

SCIENCE!!!!!

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

I've posted articles multiple times about Long-Covid among teachers.

Cool. And?

But the catch I just saw is that, as of a few months ago, California was doing much better in that sense compared to the entire country. Which I'm sure varies by CA school district. LAUSD hasn't done well.

Well (for about the twentieth time), districts actually track this stuff and I've given you the links right to the various dashboards and reporting for LAUSD and my own district. That covers the two biggest in the state so that's more than a good starting point to examine your claim. Right now LAUSD has a positive case rate just barely above 1%, SDUSD is just below that number. All this stuff is documented and you don't need any "articles" to get the information. But that's beside the point.


Getting back to your contention that my school district (or any school district for that matter) "is about ground zero for direct viral impact on jobs", I'm not seeing anything other than typical deflection from you. Your last link had nothing to do with anything.


Sooooo... try again. I'm patient. Afterall, I work with preteens who act very similarly to you in this regard.

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

Possibly, perhaps, should, could, might have never been metrics and they are not measurable. Unless, of course, you have a crystal ball.

SCIENCE!!!!!

Last time I posted statistics from actual sCiEnCe!, this poster claimed the data was being fluffed by the schools. It's a great defense mechanism to actual knowledge.

[goodheathen]

No, because it's true, because dishonesty and laziness are part of human nature. Schools - I can't say how many - do fudge the numbers and occasionally they're outed.

Currently it's fairly easy - just don't count/report as official COVID absences those who find themselves exposed, positive, or symptomatic elsewhere (very likely home) and therefore don't go to school and get tested. It's consistent enough with both the LA County positivity rate (over 4%, making 1% at schools suspiciously low) and rampant LAUSD absenteeism.
https://edsource.org/updates/chronic...spaper-reports

Although teacher absenteeism is what I was talking about, from chronic illness caused by the virus. Local stats I haven't found, but I don't believe it's minimal in a county hit very hard by the virus. There most likely will never be stats on employee chronic fatigue specifically. I expect it to be a problem for all industries. Edit: I forgot about other school employees, such as bus drivers, although ultimately teachers matter the most for school operations.

[stablegenius]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

I expect better logic from someone who claims to work in a school district, which is about ground zero for direct viral impact on jobs.

Negativity has nothing to do with veracity.

Fatigue from non-viral sources usually is treatable. No post-viral fatigue that I know of is treatable with any reliability.

As far as I know, COVID-19 is the most prevalent virus ever that often causes a while of significant fatigue.

The only tangible improvement from a year ago is in preventing hospitalizations and deaths, some of which goes out the window if too many people won't get boosted or a nasty variant emerges.

Tell me how society can handle another 5% of working-age adults dealing with chronic fatigue.

I have to be honest, I don't even read your posts anymore. I just skim right past them and see what others are saying. You say the same thing over, and over, and over again. I just have to ask though, what now? The world has opened up and things seem to be going fine. Death rate is still fairly low, hospitalizations are still low, even as cases rise. You say you're not a covid zero person, yet you harp on this day and night. You say you're not a forever masking person, but I don't think that's true. I think you'd have us wear masks forever, but to what end? What is the goal? You keep saying we need to "get this under control", but what does control look like to you? How many cases/deaths/hospitalizations are acceptable? What's that number? At this point, the world is not going to go back into Shanghai style lockdowns so any hope of using a lockdown to squash the virus is long gone. Best chance of that was in Spring of 2020. Besides, the virus is everywhere now, so a lockdown would not work. Masks have been shown to do little against Omicron as well, so I really have to wonder, what are you wanting to happen? Why bother testing on travel either? To keep numbers down? Until when?

[stablegenius]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Feel free to elaborate on this. Bonus if you can for once avoid using terms like "I think/I'm guessing/estimating/surmising/assuming", etc.

You forgot "probably"

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

No, because it's true, because dishonesty and laziness are part of human nature. Schools - I can't say how many - do fudge the numbers and occasionally they're outed.

Currently it's fairly easy - just don't count/report as official COVID absences those who find themselves exposed, positive, or symptomatic elsewhere (very likely home) and therefore don't go to school and get tested.

Right. It's a big conspiracy.

Meanwhile, people who actually go outside, or in my case work in schools, know otherwise. There's a whole process how this works and there's a chain of accountability. But you would know more apparently.

Although teacher absenteeism is what I was talking about, from chronic illness caused by the virus. Local stats I haven't found, but I don't believe it's minimal in a county hit very hard by the virus.

So you're just guessing as usual. You have no idea.

Meanwhile (and stop me if you've seen me say this lately), people who actually work in schools know otherwise.

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by stablegenius

I have to be honest, I don't even read your posts anymore. I just skim right past them and see what others are saying. You say the same thing over, and over, and over again. I just have to ask though, what now? The world has opened up and things seem to be going fine. Death rate is still fairly low, hospitalizations are still low, even as cases rise. You say you're not a covid zero person, yet you harp on this day and night. You say you're not a forever masking person, but I don't think that's true. I think you'd have us wear masks forever, but to what end? What is the goal? You keep saying we need to "get this under control", but what does control look like to you? How many cases/deaths/hospitalizations are acceptable? What's that number? At this point, the world is not going to go back into Shanghai style lockdowns so any hope of using a lockdown to squash the virus is long gone. Best chance of that was in Spring of 2020. Besides, the virus is everywhere now, so a lockdown would not work. Masks have been shown to do little against Omicron as well, so I really have to wonder, what are you wanting to happen? Why bother testing on travel either? To keep numbers down? Until when?

It's hard to take them seriously.

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by stablegenius

I have to be honest, I don't even read your posts anymore. I just skim right past them and see what others are saying. You say the same thing over, and over, and over again. I just have to ask though, what now? The world has opened up and things seem to be going fine. Death rate is still fairly low, hospitalizations are still low, even as cases rise. You say you're not a covid zero person, yet you harp on this day and night. You say you're not a forever masking person, but I don't think that's true. I think you'd have us wear masks forever, but to what end? What is the goal? You keep saying we need to "get this under control", but what does control look like to you? How many cases/deaths/hospitalizations are acceptable? What's that number? At this point, the world is not going to go back into Shanghai style lockdowns so any hope of using a lockdown to squash the virus is long gone. Best chance of that was in Spring of 2020. Besides, the virus is everywhere now, so a lockdown would not work. Masks have been shown to do little against Omicron as well, so I really have to wonder, what are you wanting to happen? Why bother testing on travel either? To keep numbers down? Until when?

Why should I read your "genius" posts when your attitude is willful ignorance and playing dumb?

"Fine" is not 20% or so of infected people developing Long-Covid.

I've said multiple times that test-to-fly is to keep out new variants and that the waiting game is for better vaccines and treatments (because nothing available now is good enough). Test-to-fly for the next 10 years would be fine with me - it's not that big a deal. The only likely perpetual masking should be for some professions (especially healthcare) and very high-risk people.