Public Health Claims COVID-19 Case Increase is "Astronomical"

Everyone already knew that SBTOWNIE...the point is they aren't spreading it at school. The kids spreading it are the ones NOT in school...which is why you haven't seen outbreaks in schools...it's been kid to kid in unsupervised settings with friends at the park, beach, cousins house, etc...

There is plenty of evidence of outbreaks at schools across the nation, and the world. To think it could somehow get better if kids are in classrooms wearing insufficient masks, is delusion. I don't disagree with you kids are getting it from hangouts. I see kids who live around me hanging out with friends all the time, riding in cars, meeting up, hanging out on the street together, etc. Some of them also go to school daily. COVID is airborne, there is now plenty of evidence for that. We were all told about droplet spread, but aeresol spread is proven to be real. Combine that with kids sitting in classrooms all day, insufficient masking, the B117 mutation (which is far more contagious), and you've got a recipe for disaster. One of the other groups of people getting heavily infected according to our officials are office/clerical workers. What does an office remind you of? A classroom.

And there is plenty more evidence of outbreaks (AS IN RIGHT HERE IN CALI) when schools are closed. Again, as per public health officials...studies are showing that there is less community spread with schools open in the manner that we here in SB can be open! Montecito Union is spending quite a bit more time outside. Lot of handwashing and plexiglass. But again, as per public health, the best data right now is indicating that having kids in school is the safer environment.

SBTOWNIE - there have been no outbreaks in local schools. The school outbreaks have been at schools in the South were they didn't take serious precautions, at Christian summer camps, etc. CA schools are required to implement strict monitoring and precautions. I'd feel safe with my kids at school than playing with a bunch of friends at the park. I do allow my older kid to participate in HS sport "practice" only because it is monitored and safe. Only 1 or 2 positive cases due to school sports. All the other cases are due to unsupervised kids/teens hanging out and spreading it without even knowing it.

By the logic of everyone here advocating for school openings, we should just reopen everything then except indoor dining without masks. New studies coming out show that once transmission within a community reaches a certain level, schools DO contribute to the spread of COVID. A lot of survivor bias showing up here, and failure to distinguish between what a school like MUS or the private schools can carry out (and whose students are most likely to be infected to begin with), and what will play out in the general public schools overall.

Actually we're just referencing the Public Health official from their last briefing about schools in which they said studies out of the US and Europe were showing that there was less community spread with schools in session. So...what are you actually referencing, because I'm referencing our local health official....

SBTownie, you're contradicting yourself. You keep talking about insufficient mask usage, then go onto to say its airborne with aerosol spread. I agree with this and think that's exactly why, even though we have widespread mask usage, cases have continued to climb. Non-N95 masks are useless against airborne viruses/aerosols. I also believe this widespread cloth / paper mask usage has actually increased the spread (of an airborne viruses/aerosols) due to the constant touching of the mask (very bad PPE protocol) and the false sense of security that cause many embrace masks (and engage in behaviors they wouldn't have otherwise). Also, just as there wasn't "widespread" fraud, there has not been "widespread" outbreaks in states and countries that have had school open. You are free to continue remote learning as long as you see fit, your family, your choice.

Keep in mind that outbreaks in schools do NOT equal an increase risk of community spread. There are "outbreaks" in all kinds of community settings: workplaces, churches, restaurants, and most importantly in family homes. Schools (when using precautions) have NOT contributed to an increase in community spread (this is now well understood by the CDC). Keep in mind that many schools have been open in Santa Barbara since August and the COVID numbers have not correlated with school openings here or in other areas. The key here is the negative impact on the community of schools being closed vs. the negative impact schools pose on "community" outbreak.

VOR, please tell me - I sincerely mean this - how I am contradicting myself? Please can you help me understand? What you wrote after that declaration seems to be in line with exactly what I am saying - that COVID is airborne, aeresolized, and therefore the masks many children are wearing are useless. While I see many adults in N95 or the slightly less secure Asian KN94, etc. variants, I mostly see children in cloth masks. This could be anecdotal, but I am guessing it is because most masks are not designed to fit children's small faces. Thus, they are stuck in flimsy masks that as you say could even contribute to spread, versus inhibit spread of aeresolized particles, etc. Please help me understand how I am contradicting myself.

SBTOWNIE, the important thing to note is that while there are outbreaks AT schools, they are not spreading AT schools - they are a result of community spread. I initially was against reopening schools. I have been closely following the opening of schools across the country, and reading reports about outbreaks. I look for results and reports about once/ month. What I've found is that so far, in every case where schools are taking proper precautions, the spread is occurring OUTSIDE of schools, not AT schools.

If you have different data that contradicts that, I'd love to see it. We learn more about the virus every day - and there are plenty of schools across the country that are open. From what I've read so far, contact tracers have traced school outbreaks to parties, etc., not schools.

(I do not think we should open schools in SB with our current rates of infection, which are increasing. Frankly, we are likely going to have difficulty maintaining staffing levels. We need to bend the curve downward first.)

I agree. And I thought the new testing bus with 500 appointments per day was a great improvement until I saw that it is moving around the county every 2 weeks? The county said it could be headed to Lompoc next. Huh?

What matters to me is the rate of vaccination, not the rate of testing. Get the job done!!!

Because science said it was safer (plus obviously a lot better) to have kids in school then out...so...we adjusted based on that science to a more logical plan.

The current 7-day average case rate (with no 7-day lag) is currently 96.6. The population that the SBPHD uses for SB County is 456,373 persons. To get the case rate, take the new cases on any given day and divide them by the population. Do this for 7 consecutive days and then take the average of those seven days.

Our public health (science if you will), said this:

"“I come to you with data that I didn’t know until this morning and I wouldn’t know until ahead of time,” said Susan Klein-Rothschild with the Public Health Department. Klein-Rothschild was referring to the unpredictable turns of the pandemic and that recent data shows it is safe to open schools and that students are more likely to follow guidelines in school than out of school with friends.

And from what little has played out in Santa Barbara Unified so far, it appears true. There has been no COVID-19 transmission on any campus since small cohorts and athletics have been allowed to resume in person"

https://www.independent.com/2020/12/16/distance-learning-taking-toll-on-santa-barbara-unified-students/

SBTownie, I don’t know who “science” is but CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said:
“The truth is, for kids K through 12, one of the safest places they can be from our perspective is to remain in school" “The [CDC] did not recommend closing schools in the spring, nor does it recommend it now.” From back in November: https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/cdc-director-redfield-says-it-does-not-recommend-closing-schools-covid-acquired-in-the-household-96256581558

Nice link - thank you.

You got that backwards. The sane version is "no vaccine, no school".

Uh, no. Teachers are currently prioritized to receive the vaccine earlier than others, regardless of age. What I am saying is: if they refuse to return to in-school instruction, they shouldn't be getting the vaccine. No in-school instruction = no vaccine.

You've still got it backwards. No school without vaccination is the sane approach.

Do you mean no school without vaccination for teachers... or no school without vaccination for every single person? Basically, are you aligning with crazy teacher unions that are looking to never go back to school or are you saying let’s get the teachers vaccinated and then start school ASAP?

The only sane answer is no school without everyone involved being vaccinated.

No, that is not the sane answer. Get the teachers into the 2nd tier (after health care workers) and get them vaccinated so that we can start planning for an early March start to school!

Why don't you call 211 and ask the PHD, instead of asking for health advice from random fools on the web?

I'm not asking for health advice. I don't take health advice "from fools on the web." My question had no personal utility. But I was and still am interested in other people's theories. I find other people's thoughts interesting. Sorry you don't.

Ah, so you revel in speculation from non-primary sources. OK: Retired people are being attacked by space monkeys.

@6:20pm, no need to be weird. I think Bene's observation IS interesting. Maybe retired/unemployed people go out more, or have friends and family get-togethers more frequently than those who are busy working? I do think it's strange that they lumped these two together, though. Retired folks and unemployed folks are (in this climate of shutdowns) typically two completely different demographics.

Perhaps older people are particularly susceptible to infection? Maybe when they go shofar groceries a few virus particles get through their cloth masks, and that is enough to infect them? Just a guess.

You are really trying hard to pick a fight with someone. Are you okay? My post was so benign can't believe THAT could be controversial! LOL. If you don't like to hear other people's opinions, why are you on EdHat? Unlike you, I think there can be value in getting a conversation going. You don't have to believe or be influenced by what others say, but there are a few people on here who are intelligent and qualified in various fields, and have interesting thoughts to share. That is why most people are on here---because they are interested in other people's opinions. If you are not, and have to be so unpleasant, you don't have to read EdHat, no one is forcing you.

Bene, I hope you're well. With respect to your question, I'll just offer my opinion that these observations are incorrect and largely worthless for the following reasons. First of all, "people under 18 years of age" is not an occupation that I've ever heard of. Furthermore, people under 18 years are only 9% of the cases (see the SBPHD Dashboard), which doesn't sound like "most affected" to me. The classification of cases is suspect as well. I get tested weekly, and I don't fill out any questionnaires regarding my demographics. It appears that no information on the employment status of an individual is lumped in to the "none" category, which is being interpreted here as "retired/unemployed". You can see this breakdown for various areas in our county here (https://publichealthsbc.org/testing/). Look at the infographic for Goleta. You can see that 60% of cases in Goleta are categorized as "none"; it's 64% "none" for the state of California. Does that mean that we have 60%+ retired/unemployed, or just that they don't have enough information to classify these cases? In summary, don't worry too much about that data supplied from contact tracing, as it's only as good as the process used to collect it. As of today, contact tracers have determined that 44% of COVID transmissions are unknown or under investigation, which speaks volumes.

Shopping for groceries! Sorry about the typo.

Thanks much Chem!

If you're interested in fiction and speculation, read a comic book. If you want valid information about the pandemic, ask the public health department.

PHD would know, but my theory is that a subset of the retired and unemployed are bored and need social interaction. So they are going ahead with it, regardless. This does not apply to all, of course. In my own personal experience, I have a couple of relatives (not here) who fall into that category. They curtailed their social interactions, but only slightly. They continued to travel, see their friends in person, etc. Several have gotten COVID and were hospitalized and one died. One of my relatives isolated almost completely for the 10 months, leaving the house ONLY to go to the post office, and ended up on a ventilator. One trip to the post office (not here), probably with a bunch of unmasked people, considering the state they are in.

No, not eight more deaths "today". Two deaths are attributed to last week, five the week before, and one from three weeks ago. I'm now having to screen shot the 'Weekly deaths' tab on a daily basis, because it keeps changing and you can't go back to compare the data.

Surely a meaningful distinction. Glad you're keeping yourself busy.

SARS-CoV-2 is many times more infectious than influenza. That attempt at spreading FUD is a well known loser.