[Stylo]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

There are quite a few falsehoods that are continuing to get repeated in this thread that make the discussion go around in circles. I very much blame the media, as well as politicians - the same ones demanding we listen to science yet denounce doctors that don’t agree with their agenda. So many talking points that it’s gotten to be nauseating.

A lot also spreads in social media circles as well.

But yes, media has taken the “lack of evidence must mean the worst possible outcome” stance all year, even if it goes against the experts.

[Lincolnian]

The travel advisory has lost all credibility with me. The fact that VT was added to the list with a 1.9% positivity rate, the lowest in the nation, shows the uselessness of this policy. The advisory is no longer connected to science since states with high positivity that have a "deal" with much higher positivity rates than CT are free to move around while many lower risk states are not. I support federal guidelines on travel including a mask mandate. We are not preEU Europe. Citizens of one state should not be prohibited from traveling among the states of the UNITED STATES since we are all citizens of the same country. If there is a localized areas that is significantly higher than average, such as is the case with South Dakota, Iowa, etc., that is a different story. The federal government should take the lead and deploy the CDC to get those areas under control by bringing in doctors, supplies, setting up testing operations, and other necessary support to implement the appropriate protocols already established by the CDC for containing infectious diseases. This is the reason we have the CDC, it is part of our national security. CT and the other states should not be determining individual policies that have the potential to adversely affect the nation as a whole. This includes health, economic and social well being. These policies amplify divisiveness and work against our United States.

[RoundTableKnight]

Idk man

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by Lincolnian

The travel advisory has lost all credibility with me. The fact that VT was added to the list with a 1.9% positivity rate, the lowest in the nation, shows the uselessness of this policy. The advisory is no longer connected to science since states with high positivity that have a "deal" with much higher positivity rates than CT are free to move around while many lower risk states are not. I support federal guidelines on travel including a mask mandate. We are not preEU Europe. Citizens of one state should not be prohibited from traveling among the states of the UNITED STATES since we are all citizens of the same country. If there is a localized areas that is significantly higher than average, such as is the case with South Dakota, Iowa, etc., that is a different story. The federal government should take the lead and deploy the CDC to get those areas under control by bringing in doctors, supplies, setting up testing operations, and other necessary support to implement the appropriate protocols already established by the CDC for containing infectious diseases. This is the reason we have the CDC, it is part of our national security. CT and the other states should not be determining individual policies that have the potential to adversely affect the nation as a whole. This includes health, economic and social well being. These policies amplify divisiveness and work against our United States.

Agreed. It's pointless. There's a higher infection rate in FFC than VT, but I'm supposed to quarantine if I happen to visit VT?

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Lincolnian

The travel advisory has lost all credibility with me. The fact that VT was added to the list with a 1.9% positivity rate, the lowest in the nation, shows the uselessness of this policy. The advisory is no longer connected to science since states with high positivity that have a "deal" with much higher positivity rates than CT are free to move around while many lower risk states are not. I support federal guidelines on travel including a mask mandate. We are not preEU Europe. Citizens of one state should not be prohibited from traveling among the states of the UNITED STATES since we are all citizens of the same country. If there is a localized areas that is significantly higher than average, such as is the case with South Dakota, Iowa, etc., that is a different story. The federal government should take the lead and deploy the CDC to get those areas under control by bringing in doctors, supplies, setting up testing operations, and other necessary support to implement the appropriate protocols already established by the CDC for containing infectious diseases. This is the reason we have the CDC, it is part of our national security. CT and the other states should not be determining individual policies that have the potential to adversely affect the nation as a whole. This includes health, economic and social well being. These policies amplify divisiveness and work against our United States.

+1. It’s very strange and has been from day one. Why CT is partnered up with NJ but not MA or RI, I don’t know. Why a curfew helps contain the virus, I don’t know. This trial and error with school districts is also confusing - either open them all, or close them all. This “one student tests positive and entire school shut down” is embarrassingly ineffective and does nothing but make life difficult and confusing, and is psychologically damaging to children.

I sincerely hope CT doesn’t lock down again. The financial result will be catastrophic.

[gmdealerguy]

This is interesting if turns out to be true:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/h...36bbac4cda41a5

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

Agreed. It's pointless. There's a higher infection rate in FFC than VT, but I'm supposed to quarantine if I happen to visit VT?

Political theater.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by gmdealerguy

This is interesting if turns out to be true:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/h...36bbac4cda41a5

A lot of studies have pointed to this, but research takes time. The media has been absolutely irresponsible reporting things like immunity only lasts a few months. And it's spread on social media like a bad meme. NY Times has been better, they've posted several articles stating reinfection is extremely rare.

Yes, antibodies wane after a few months, but to conclude that's the only measure of immunity is scientifically unsound. Antibodies show a recent infection, T and B cells produce new antibodies when necessary when antibodies wane. Once those are gone, then you're vulnerable again. With other coronaviruses, particularly SARS, those T and B cells can last years.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

+1. It’s very strange and has been from day one. Why CT is partnered up with NJ but not MA or RI, I don’t know. Why a curfew helps contain the virus, I don’t know. This trial and error with school districts is also confusing - either open them all, or close them all. This “one student tests positive and entire school shut down” is embarrassingly ineffective and does nothing but make life difficult and confusing, and is psychologically damaging to children.

I sincerely hope CT doesn’t lock down again. The financial result will be catastrophic.

Lamont seems to have said no to another complete lockdown for now. It will really depend on how bad the infections get in coming weeks.

As I understand from administrators I know, the school shut down happens so the school can be cleaned and disinfected to prevent further spread.

The reason it happens in some cases with just one or two students or staff has to do with their movements throughout the building in the days and weeks preceding the positive results.

If the student was only limited to one or two rooms and the hallway, it doesn’t take long and there likely is a short shutdown. It may not even affect the entire school. If they were in multiple classrooms, the gym, the library, the cafeteria and other public spaces, and/or in contact with a lot of people, the shutdown has to be longer.

Then there is the time needed to do tracing other students and staff that student came in contact with. That takes time. I know it seems arbitrary but there really is some logic behind it. Jay

[michael917]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

I sincerely hope CT doesn’t lock down again. The financial result will be catastrophic.

I'm with you. I think we're safe for now, but given that I'm having a hard enough time finding work with businesses up and running, it's going to get really bad if places start closing.

Also, if there's another lockdown, what will be the motivation to ever open again? Warm weather is 5-6 months away, the vaccine is at least that long. I envision a second lockdown lasting far longer than the first one did. So I vote no.