|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine.
But that's the case with everything. The education level is linked to income and wealth is linked to health, employment is linked to health and crime rates, etc. etc. The economic outfall (which will result in human suffering and death) from the measures must be taken into account.
It's a balance act, so we can't just stop deaths and suffering on one end and ignore it at the other end.
Children need education, we have a duty to provide it to them. People need sunlight, socialization, a stable income, and many other things.
The cure to the disease should not become worse than the disease itself. This is why, even after vaccination, we have to understand that we can't prevent every death and all suffering caused by the virus. It will be with us for many years to come, probably for hundreds of years.
All we can do is reduce death and suffering, not eradicate it.
|
On December 28 2020 20:27 Anc13nt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2020 18:49 BerserkSword wrote:On December 25 2020 18:03 SC-Shield wrote:
Are you guys gonna take a COVID-19 vaccine? If so, which one do you prefer? I see a lot of anti-vaxxers due to quickly developed vaccines and the usual microchip conspiracy. I won't take an mRNA one. and it has nothing to do with a microchip conspiracy theory I can understand if you are uncomfortable with taking it until many others have and it is confirmed beyond all doubt to be safe, if that is what you mean. Otherwise, if you mean that you will not take it under any circumstance, I would like to ask why.
I will not take it under any circumstance.
The idea of getting my own cells to produce a Covid 19 protein in order to agitate the immune system is not something I am comfortable doing, especially based on the fact that this is the first mRNA vaccine administered to the community and done so as an emergency act (emergency authorization entails less rigorous testing than a real FDA approval, for example).
I do not want anything to do with any potential autoimmune dysfunction. Autoimmune diseases are terrible. They are relatively poorly understood, extremely difficult to treat, and affect multiple organ systems. The morbidity is high. On the other hand, I'm in an extremely low risk group when it comes to COVID 19. On top of that, one of my parents unfortunately has an autoimmune disease since the age of 13, which means I am probably genetically predisposed to autoimmune dysfunction.
Add that to the fact that I am self-employed and "work" from home, wear a respirator everywhere I go, etc. I know which risk I'm taking.
|
The swiss authority did a normal process of approval without any shortcuts and they said it's fine.
|
On December 29 2020 14:53 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine. But that's the case with everything. The education level is linked to income and wealth is linked to health, employment is linked to health and crime rates, etc. etc. The economic outfall (which will result in human suffering and death) from the measures must be taken into account. It's a balance act, so we can't just stop deaths and suffering on one end and ignore it at the other end. Children need education, we have a duty to provide it to them. People need sunlight, socialization, a stable income, and many other things. The cure to the disease should not become worse than the disease itself. This is why, even after vaccination, we have to understand that we can't prevent every death and all suffering caused by the virus. It will be with us for many years to come, probably for hundreds of years. All we can do is reduce death and suffering, not eradicate it.
Are you implying that remote teaching/learning is not education? Children need, and are receiving, education.
|
On December 29 2020 18:46 Artisreal wrote:
The swiss authority did a normal process of approval without any shortcuts and they said it's fine.
I am not familiar with the swiss system, but, even so, we still dont know longer term effects it could have.
It's just not a risk I'm willing to take. There is not enough data on the mRNA methodology in the context of vaccinations for me for me to take the risk, in the context of other things.
|
On December 29 2020 19:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 14:53 Magic Powers wrote:On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine. But that's the case with everything. The education level is linked to income and wealth is linked to health, employment is linked to health and crime rates, etc. etc. The economic outfall (which will result in human suffering and death) from the measures must be taken into account. It's a balance act, so we can't just stop deaths and suffering on one end and ignore it at the other end. Children need education, we have a duty to provide it to them. People need sunlight, socialization, a stable income, and many other things. The cure to the disease should not become worse than the disease itself. This is why, even after vaccination, we have to understand that we can't prevent every death and all suffering caused by the virus. It will be with us for many years to come, probably for hundreds of years. All we can do is reduce death and suffering, not eradicate it. Are you implying that remote teaching/learning is not education? Children need, and are receiving, education.
Online teaching has very, very significant limitations. It impairs children's ability to fully digest what they learn, and it impairs the teachers' ability to fully teach what they know. Direct teaching is very important. And that's not all, children also need the social interaction as well. And then there may also be other factors we don't even consider.
In the long run, online teaching for children is simply not a solution. We need them to return to the classroom as quickly as possible.
|
On December 29 2020 06:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 01:25 warding wrote:
I don't think we're that far away fro mthe end of the tunnel, but that depends on where you are. We're still in 2020 and Israel has already vaccinated 4% of their population.
Depending on where you look in Europe or North America, by the end of March you'll easily have between 15% and 30% of the population infected. Add to that 20-30% of the population vaccinated by that time and we might be entering the second trimester with a decent level of immunity, meaning a lot fewer infections in the population. Not to mention hospitalizations and deaths plummeting once you get everyone 70 yo and up vaccinated, which should happen in the first trimester as well.
I think the EU has completely dropped the ball in building up capacity and buying up vaccines up to now. Hopefully a sense of urgency emerges once everyone realizes that most other developed nations are ahead of us. Not in the United States. According to Worldometer, we have about 20M total cases, out of 330M Americans, over the last 9 months. 20/330 = 6% of our population currently, and it'd be a stretch to even get to 10% of our population infected by late March. 10% infected is possible, but 15% definitely isn't (thankfully). My birthday is April 14th, and it looks like it'll be close to around 30-40% of the population being "temporarily immune" (vaccinated + recovered Americans) around my birthday, which is only about halfway to herd immunity (which is what actually matters). Around summertime, vaccines will be publicly available for most American adults, and if trials for children can be cleared by around then, children can start getting vaccinated in the fall. I'm hoping that we can reach a reasonable level of immunity by the fall of 2021, but there's simply no way we're going to hit that by March/April. (Speaking only for the United States.) Keep in mind that a reasonable level of immunity is like 60-80%, not 30-40%.
On the number of infections, the CDC estimates that up to November, there have been 91 million infections in the US (95% UI* 77.8 - 107.5). That's already 27.5%. This is because not all infections are reported, either because they were assymptomatic and thus people didn't have a reason to get tested, or because they shrugged it off as a flu or cold, or because they thought they'd have too much to lose if they found out they had the disease and had to quarantine and miss work, for example. I think it's quite reasonable to assume 30% infections in the US by March.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html
I understand herd immunity requires a much higher % of people infected than 30%-40%. However this works on a continuum. Rt is directly related to what % of the population is still susceptible. With every percentage point decrease in susceptible population, it becomes easier to bring the reproduction number down. My point is that the share of susceptible population in the US is going to decrease from say 75% today, to ~50% in April and ~25% in July. That, plus the climate effects, are going to increasingly bring the virus under control with ever softer measures. It's likely that more infectious strains of the virus are going to make life more difficult, but it's also true that the share of the population that is vaccinated will also tend to accelerate towards the Summer.
|
On December 29 2020 19:55 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 19:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 14:53 Magic Powers wrote:On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine. But that's the case with everything. The education level is linked to income and wealth is linked to health, employment is linked to health and crime rates, etc. etc. The economic outfall (which will result in human suffering and death) from the measures must be taken into account. It's a balance act, so we can't just stop deaths and suffering on one end and ignore it at the other end. Children need education, we have a duty to provide it to them. People need sunlight, socialization, a stable income, and many other things. The cure to the disease should not become worse than the disease itself. This is why, even after vaccination, we have to understand that we can't prevent every death and all suffering caused by the virus. It will be with us for many years to come, probably for hundreds of years. All we can do is reduce death and suffering, not eradicate it. Are you implying that remote teaching/learning is not education? Children need, and are receiving, education. Online teaching has very, very significant limitations. It impairs children's ability to fully digest what they learn, and it impairs the teachers' ability to fully teach what they know. Direct teaching is very important. And that's not all, children also need the social interaction as well. And then there may also be other factors we don't even consider. In the long run, online teaching for children is simply not a solution. We need them to return to the classroom as quickly as possible.
This is specifically *not* for the long run. This is specifically until coronavirus is under control and no longer poses an imminent threat to the individuals who would otherwise be endangered from being in a school with hundreds or thousands of other people who are not vaccinated. If that ends up being a year, or even a year-and-a-half, then so be it.
Children do need social interaction, but the ideal socialization still can't occur this year because of social distancing protocols, even when schools are opened and students are inside classrooms. Collaborative learning environments are great ways for students to learn, but in-person groupwork simply isn't possible this year, because that's exactly how the virus is transmitted. Couple the necessary lack of in-class socialization with the even-more-dangerous ideas of students socializing in the hallways or cafeterias without masks, and we see precisely why reopening schools can end up being extremely harmful while not even carrying significant academic benefits. Hell, in my school, which only had teachers return to the building (while students stayed home) to test out whether or not our school could completely reopen safely, we've already had 33 cases of coronavirus *and that's just with the adults who do a much better job of following health protocols, and aren't walking from classroom to classroom multiple times every day, and this is just with a school that's about 5% full (no children)*.
I would love for everyone to return to school as quickly as possible, but that's defined by safety regulations, rather than the will of some people who don't care about everyone's health. I love teaching in person and being able to more easily build a rapport with my students, but the efficacy of my lesson on cubic polynomials is far less important than the health and safety of my students, my colleagues, myself, and all our families.
As an aside, I think you may mean something else when you said "Direct teaching is very important". In education, the phrase "direct teaching" or "direct instruction" refers to a teacher lecturing a student and giving them instructional points to memorize, rather than having students explore and discover things on their own. Direct teaching is notoriously bad / not ideal for education, because the students aren't actually learning (they're just being told facts). On the other hand, concepts like guided instruction and discovery-based learning and problem solving are better, educationally.
|
On December 29 2020 20:02 warding wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 06:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 01:25 warding wrote:
I don't think we're that far away fro mthe end of the tunnel, but that depends on where you are. We're still in 2020 and Israel has already vaccinated 4% of their population.
Depending on where you look in Europe or North America, by the end of March you'll easily have between 15% and 30% of the population infected. Add to that 20-30% of the population vaccinated by that time and we might be entering the second trimester with a decent level of immunity, meaning a lot fewer infections in the population. Not to mention hospitalizations and deaths plummeting once you get everyone 70 yo and up vaccinated, which should happen in the first trimester as well.
I think the EU has completely dropped the ball in building up capacity and buying up vaccines up to now. Hopefully a sense of urgency emerges once everyone realizes that most other developed nations are ahead of us. Not in the United States. According to Worldometer, we have about 20M total cases, out of 330M Americans, over the last 9 months. 20/330 = 6% of our population currently, and it'd be a stretch to even get to 10% of our population infected by late March. 10% infected is possible, but 15% definitely isn't (thankfully). My birthday is April 14th, and it looks like it'll be close to around 30-40% of the population being "temporarily immune" (vaccinated + recovered Americans) around my birthday, which is only about halfway to herd immunity (which is what actually matters). Around summertime, vaccines will be publicly available for most American adults, and if trials for children can be cleared by around then, children can start getting vaccinated in the fall. I'm hoping that we can reach a reasonable level of immunity by the fall of 2021, but there's simply no way we're going to hit that by March/April. (Speaking only for the United States.) Keep in mind that a reasonable level of immunity is like 60-80%, not 30-40%. On the number of infections, the CDC estimates that up to November, there have been 91 million infections in the US (95% UI* 77.8 - 107.5). That's already 27.5%. This is because not all infections are reported, either because they were assymptomatic and thus people didn't have a reason to get tested, or because they shrugged it off as a flu or cold, or because they thought they'd have too much to lose if they found out they had the disease and had to quarantine and miss work, for example. I think it's quite reasonable to assume 30% infections in the US by March. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.htmlI understand herd immunity requires a much higher % of people infected than 30%-40%. However this works on a continuum. Rt is directly related to what % of the population is still susceptible. With every percentage point decrease in susceptible population, it becomes easier to bring the reproduction number down. My point is that the share of susceptible population in the US is going to decrease from say 75% today, to ~50% in April and ~25% in July. That, plus the climate effects, are going to increasingly bring the virus under control with ever softer measures. It's likely that more infectious strains of the virus are going to make life more difficult, but it's also true that the share of the population that is vaccinated will also tend to accelerate towards the Summer.
Thank you for sharing the CDC's estimation of unreported/total cases; I hadn't seen this information before!
|
This is one of the worst examples of covididiocy I have ever seen, wow! At least they all wear masks... kinda?? They certainly make a difference here...
I am actually surprised rituals like that still exist today, even outside of pandemics.
https://fb.watch/2GPb-IDOje/
|
On December 29 2020 09:23 JimmiC wrote:
Any stats on how many are effected by long Covid? And that the consequences of that are?
There is a ton of runway between unaffected and dead.
Just like there is a ton of runway between unaffected and dead in the other causes of death that are 80-100x more likely than COVID. Let's start adding up all the anoxic brain injuries from near-drownings, deformities from car crashes, lifelong paralysis from sports injuries, etc. and then we will really get some big numbers going. The only thing we know for sure is that the only safe place for a child is locked up in a padded room, just as long as there aren't any ropes they can use to make a noose, and all their food is blended up so they can't choke.
|
On December 29 2020 20:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
As an aside, I think you may mean something else when you said "Direct teaching is very important". In education, the phrase "direct teaching" or "direct instruction" refers to a teacher lecturing a student and giving them instructional points to memorize, rather than having students explore and discover things on their own. Direct teaching is notoriously bad / not ideal for education, because the students aren't actually learning (they're just being told facts). On the other hand, concepts like guided instruction and discovery-based learning and problem solving are better, educationally.
Total offtopic, but i wanted to talk about this a bit.
I remember a far less negative view on direct instruction if done correctly from my classes on education. I think that view was mostly based on the Hattie Metastudy, where direct instruction ends up right in the middle of other learning strategies with an effect size of 0.6.
|
On December 29 2020 20:32 Slydie wrote:This is one of the worst examples of covididiocy I have ever seen, wow! At least they all wear masks... kinda?? They certainly make a difference here... I am actually surprised rituals like that still exist today, even outside of pandemics. https://fb.watch/2GPb-IDOje/
This is super cringeworthy. I also hate when people say that they're wearing a mask just because it's looped around their ears (but not covering both their nose and mouth). Like, sure, I could also probably stretch out the mask strings to wear it like a backpack or over one shoulder or around my leg, but the implication is that "wearing a mask" means wearing it correctly - over both the mouth and nose.
|
On December 29 2020 20:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 20:32 Slydie wrote:This is one of the worst examples of covididiocy I have ever seen, wow! At least they all wear masks... kinda?? They certainly make a difference here... I am actually surprised rituals like that still exist today, even outside of pandemics. https://fb.watch/2GPb-IDOje/ This is super cringeworthy. I also hate when people say that they're wearing a mask just because it's looped around their ears (but not covering both their nose and mouth). Like, sure, I could also probably stretch out the mask strings to wear it like a backpack or over one shoulder or around my leg, but the implication is that "wearing a mask" means wearing it correctly - over both the mouth and nose.
Maybe we should extend that methodology. Can i claim that i am wearing pants if i have them on my head?
|
Norway28873 Posts
On December 29 2020 19:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 14:53 Magic Powers wrote:On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine. But that's the case with everything. The education level is linked to income and wealth is linked to health, employment is linked to health and crime rates, etc. etc. The economic outfall (which will result in human suffering and death) from the measures must be taken into account. It's a balance act, so we can't just stop deaths and suffering on one end and ignore it at the other end. Children need education, we have a duty to provide it to them. People need sunlight, socialization, a stable income, and many other things. The cure to the disease should not become worse than the disease itself. This is why, even after vaccination, we have to understand that we can't prevent every death and all suffering caused by the virus. It will be with us for many years to come, probably for hundreds of years. All we can do is reduce death and suffering, not eradicate it. Are you implying that remote teaching/learning is not education? Children need, and are receiving, education.
As a teacher myself, I'm kinda implying that it isn't. I'm sure it depends on the subject, but my experience is that most children receiving online teaching are getting a way inferior product compared to the regular teaching. The most motivated and capable children from the most resourceful parents are doing just fine with online classes, but the ones who struggle in any capacity seem to struggle way, way more. Out of the ~80 or so students I'm teaching this semester, I'd estimate fewer than 10 would get a nearly equivalent education through making everything online based.
If I were given choice a) teaching as normal but a 20% chance of me catching covid the next 6 months or b) online classes, (and assuming this is just about me and not about infecting 20% of society) I'd go with a.
|
On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine.
I don't think it's misrepresenting statistics just because the statistic doesn't fit your narrative. The point is there are tons of things out there that are more dangerous to children than COVID and we've managed to accept all of those things without hysteria for many years.
|
On December 29 2020 20:32 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 09:23 JimmiC wrote:
Any stats on how many are effected by long Covid? And that the consequences of that are?
There is a ton of runway between unaffected and dead. Just like there is a ton of runway between unaffected and dead in the other causes of death that are 80-100x more likely than COVID. Let's start adding up all the anoxic brain injuries from near-drownings, deformities from car crashes, lifelong paralysis from sports injuries, etc. and then we will really get some big numbers going. The only thing we know for sure is that the only safe place for a child is locked up in a padded room, just as long as there aren't any ropes they can use to make a noose, and all their food is blended up so they can't choke.
These are really bad strawmen. These are simply not analogous to the global pandemic of coronavirus that has literally shut down the world.
The closest I can get to finding parallels between these examples and covid is the following:
-Swimming can be dangerous unless you employ safety measures, like swimming with other people, having a lifeguard on duty, and not swimming out too far if you're not a strong swimmer;
-Injuries from car accidents can be mitigated by wearing a seat belt, having air bags, and driving defensively;
-Sports injuries are likely to be less severe if proper equipment and protection are worn;
...Coronavirus would be less of an issue if people actually wore masks, socially distanced, and got vaccinated.
|
On December 29 2020 20:37 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 20:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
As an aside, I think you may mean something else when you said "Direct teaching is very important". In education, the phrase "direct teaching" or "direct instruction" refers to a teacher lecturing a student and giving them instructional points to memorize, rather than having students explore and discover things on their own. Direct teaching is notoriously bad / not ideal for education, because the students aren't actually learning (they're just being told facts). On the other hand, concepts like guided instruction and discovery-based learning and problem solving are better, educationally. Total offtopic, but i wanted to talk about this a bit. I remember a far less negative view on direct instruction if done correctly from my classes on education. I think that view was mostly based on the Hattie Metastudy, where direct instruction ends up right in the middle of other learning strategies with an effect size of 0.6.
I'll PM you, as I don't want to get too off-topic there 
On December 29 2020 20:41 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 20:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 20:32 Slydie wrote:This is one of the worst examples of covididiocy I have ever seen, wow! At least they all wear masks... kinda?? They certainly make a difference here... I am actually surprised rituals like that still exist today, even outside of pandemics. https://fb.watch/2GPb-IDOje/ This is super cringeworthy. I also hate when people say that they're wearing a mask just because it's looped around their ears (but not covering both their nose and mouth). Like, sure, I could also probably stretch out the mask strings to wear it like a backpack or over one shoulder or around my leg, but the implication is that "wearing a mask" means wearing it correctly - over both the mouth and nose. Maybe we should extend that methodology. Can i claim that i am wearing pants if i have them on my head?
Hahaha context definitely does matter!
|
On December 29 2020 20:42 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 19:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 14:53 Magic Powers wrote:On December 29 2020 09:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 29 2020 09:15 BlackJack wrote:"Not safe for students" is a subjective statement. CDC deaths for children ages 5-14 show 50 deaths from COVID and 4,748 deaths from all causes. That's 50 deaths out of a source population of 41 million. Slightly more than 1 death per million children. The 15-24 Age group shows 468 COVID deaths and 30,531 deaths from all other causes. So of all the children that died last year, COVID caused maybe 1-2% of those deaths. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htmSome quick google searches and number crunching and I surmise that teenagers are roughly 10x as likely to die from suicide than COVID Two things: 1. Students and their families, not just children. Even if children are asymptomatic, they can bring it home to their parents (or god forbid grandparents). 2. I absolutely hate when people only look at deaths as the only dangerous effect of coronavirus. It's misrepresenting statistics. Loss of senses, multiple organ failure, not being able to breathe, complications with additional diseases... it's not just a matter of dying vs. being totally fine. But that's the case with everything. The education level is linked to income and wealth is linked to health, employment is linked to health and crime rates, etc. etc. The economic outfall (which will result in human suffering and death) from the measures must be taken into account. It's a balance act, so we can't just stop deaths and suffering on one end and ignore it at the other end. Children need education, we have a duty to provide it to them. People need sunlight, socialization, a stable income, and many other things. The cure to the disease should not become worse than the disease itself. This is why, even after vaccination, we have to understand that we can't prevent every death and all suffering caused by the virus. It will be with us for many years to come, probably for hundreds of years. All we can do is reduce death and suffering, not eradicate it. Are you implying that remote teaching/learning is not education? Children need, and are receiving, education. As a teacher myself, I'm kinda implying that it isn't. I'm sure it depends on the subject, but my experience is that most children receiving online teaching are getting a way inferior product compared to the regular teaching. The most motivated and capable children from the most resourceful parents are doing just fine with online classes, but the ones who struggle in any capacity seem to struggle way, way more. Out of the ~80 or so students I'm teaching this semester, I'd estimate fewer than 10 would get a nearly equivalent education through making everything online based.
I think the comparison needs to be between current remote learning models and current in-class models that abide by the necessary safety regulations of masks, social distancing, etc., as opposed to comparing remote learning models to what ideal, perfect, not-needing-to-worry-about-coronavirus teaching setups would be, because coronavirus needs to be factored into the equation. For example, in-person collaborative learning / social learning is straight-up off the table, this year, but students could still collaborate remotely. I agree with you that remote learning isn't ideal, and I don't know a single teacher who would prefer to permanently teach online and never return to the classroom, but "ideal" isn't on the table at the moment. It's simply not an option.
If I were given choice a) teaching as normal but a 20% chance of me catching covid the next 6 months or b) online classes, (and assuming this is just about me and not about infecting 20% of society) I'd go with a.
Would your answer change if you considered the hundreds (thousands?) of other people that could catch covid from that decision? That decision doesn't only give you a 20% chance of catching covid; it would give a 20% (or whatever percent) chance to all of your students, your colleagues, and everyone's family members. It affects the entire community.
|
On December 29 2020 20:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2020 20:32 BlackJack wrote:On December 29 2020 09:23 JimmiC wrote:
Any stats on how many are effected by long Covid? And that the consequences of that are?
There is a ton of runway between unaffected and dead. Just like there is a ton of runway between unaffected and dead in the other causes of death that are 80-100x more likely than COVID. Let's start adding up all the anoxic brain injuries from near-drownings, deformities from car crashes, lifelong paralysis from sports injuries, etc. and then we will really get some big numbers going. The only thing we know for sure is that the only safe place for a child is locked up in a padded room, just as long as there aren't any ropes they can use to make a noose, and all their food is blended up so they can't choke. These are really bad strawmen. These are simply not analogous to the global pandemic of coronavirus that has literally shut down the world. The closest I can get to finding parallels between these examples and covid is the following: -Swimming can be dangerous unless you employ safety measures, like swimming with other people, having a lifeguard on duty, and not swimming out too far if you're not a strong swimmer; -Injuries from car accidents can be mitigated by wearing a seat belt, having air bags, and driving defensively; -Sports injuries are likely to be less severe if proper equipment and protection are worn; ...Coronavirus would be less of an issue if people actually wore masks, socially distanced, and got vaccinated.
The only parallel you should be looking for is that both COVID and other injuries/illnesses that affect children have non-death bad outcomes. Since I was accused of misrepresenting statistics by not talking about the non-death complications of COVID I am merely pointing out that I also didn't talk about the non-death complications of other injuries/illnesses either so I am actually being completely fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
