Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump Must 'Dislike' Teachers and Children...

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    As to bad examples - especially with regards to opening schools too soon - take Israel:
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/israel...lockdown-gains

    Also this: "Can kids spread the coronavirus? 'Conclusively, without a doubt – yes,' experts say"
    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/h...ed/5450062002/

    So can it be done safely - yes. Can it be done safely in all conditions - no. One of the problems is that person does not need to show symptoms in order to carry and spread the virus. This includes kids. And while the kids themselves might be fine (at least if long term effects are ignored), are their parents & siblings going to be?



    And oddly enough there is this: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/17/p...ols/index.html - which is hopefully just pouting about this https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cdc-del...ning-guidance/ instead of more of 'ignore science'.
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
      Except when we already can see effects which show trauma that has long term effects being caused by the disease. Or are you really saying that when we know that certain type of injury is a long term effect - and we know that the infection has caused it - that it still can not be said to cause long term damage?

      The thing we don't know is if it causes even more damage. But we already know it can cause long term effects even in mild cases.

      If you take it seriously it will certainly wont be such.
      How can you see long term effects when it has not been a long enough time to see "long term" effects yet? I guess our definitions of long term are different.



      “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” -- Albert Einstein

      The US Constitution doesn't need to be rewritten it needs to be reread

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by slick24 View Post
        How can you see long term effects when it has not been a long enough time to see "long term" effects yet?
        Because we already know that certain kind of tissue and/or neurological damage causes long term effects regardless of the source of that damage. And we know that this infection even in mild form can cause that same damage. Unless you can prove that the same damage which causes long term effects when caused by other sources does not in fact cause long term damage when caused by this infection there is little to discuss. That being said it is possible that this infection may cause even more long term effects than those already known - so we know it causes long term effects, we just don't yet know how many and how often.
        It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
          we just don't yet know how many and how often.
          I will agree with that


          “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” -- Albert Einstein

          The US Constitution doesn't need to be rewritten it needs to be reread

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            Sure, but Finland did not enforce any kind of curfew. Fair number of kids regularly went out with other kids (was often even in national news) and hang around together. And grades pre through 3 remained open. So it is not exactly a comparison between absolute extremes. And the measures taken inside school hardly mattered when kids clustered together outside the school. Which is why i said it is interesting but i wouldn't immediately draw from it the conclusions some of here seem to be making - especially without any understanding of the context.
            Of course kids are going to mix to a degree even under lock down. Finland isn't Nazi Germany. But it is a valid comparison in that Swedish kids were getting an education and Finnish ones weren't. Swedish kids had no worse health outcomes than Finish ones despite being free and going to school. In the US the proposal is that schools are suspended indefinitely America too is not Nazi Germany so even under lock down many children will mix. So unlikely to be any health benefit in keeping schools closed and the damage to children is going to be even greater due to the longer period of no schooling.
            "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Surrey View Post
              Of course kids are going to mix to a degree even under lock down. Finland isn't Nazi Germany. But it is a valid comparison in that Swedish kids were getting an education and Finnish ones weren't. Swedish kids had no worse health outcomes than Finish ones despite being free and going to school.
              Actually that is somewhat misleading too. Here all the education was possible via remote learning and remote lectures. Even for 1st through 3rd graders if their parents so choose. I know my nephew (3rd grader) had to sit by a computer/pad/phone from 8 or 9 until that days lessons were over. And then start doing homework from books/notebooks as they had brought all the books home when the schools closed. So the education continued all the time for every one. Teachers usually (but not always) made the remote lectures from schools. The main worry here was in essence the lack of social growth the school provide by having kids together. The actual material taught was the same regardless.
              n the US the proposal is that schools are suspended indefinitely America too is not Nazi Germany so even under lock down many children will mix. So unlikely to be any health benefit in keeping schools closed and the damage to children is going to be even greater due to the longer period of no schooling.
              If you can not arrange remote lectures and such then maybe depending on situation. However lessons should be learned from the Israeli example and also how to arrange the schools to function so that the groups would not unnecessarily mix. And also close down and quarantine in case of an positive test result. Keep in mind that i wasn't saying that the US should not open the schools at all. They should just not do so in all or nothing basis. In my opinion it should be regional (not even state level but lower) decision based purely on the status of the disease (rate of spreading etc.) in each and every location individually. Messing this up by starting it too early will only end up costing a lot more. This should absolutely not be a political issue.
              It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                Actually that is somewhat misleading too. Here all the education was possible via remote learning and remote lectures. Even for 1st through 3rd graders if their parents so choose. I know my nephew (3rd grader) had to sit by a computer/pad/phone from 8 or 9 until that days lessons were over. And then start doing homework from books/notebooks as they had brought all the books home when the schools closed. So the education continued all the time for every one. Teachers usually (but not always) made the remote lectures from schools. The main worry here was in essence the lack of social growth the school provide by having kids together. The actual material taught was the same regardless.

                If you can not arrange remote lectures and such then maybe depending on situation. However lessons should be learned from the Israeli example and also how to arrange the schools to function so that the groups would not unnecessarily mix. And also close down and quarantine in case of an positive test result. Keep in mind that i wasn't saying that the US should not open the schools at all. They should just not do so in all or nothing basis. In my opinion it should be regional (not even state level but lower) decision based purely on the status of the disease (rate of spreading etc.) in each and every location individually. Messing this up by starting it too early will only end up costing a lot more. This should absolutely not be a political issue.
                On line education is a poor substitute for real schooling as some of the links I have posted from various child psychologists show.
                "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                  On line education is a poor substitute for real schooling as some of the links I have posted from various child psychologists show.
                  Yes, it is. But if it is run in the right way, it can be beneficial. My son is in his first year of college and is taking his courses on line. He had a hard time transitioning, but he had the self-discipline to get it done.

                  And if the alternative is getting sick and possibly dying from the virus, then there is no choice in the matter.

                  I got my masters on line and it was both interesting and beneficial (as well as expensive) and was well worth the effort.

                  Friends of mine who are teachers are nervous about going back and afraid of getting sick-and many parents are concerned about their childrens' health.

                  Our county made the decision to have two days attending regular classes and three on line. We'll see how that works out.

                  I wonder if Trump, for all his demagoguery and bluster, as well as making his usual 'decrees' on the subject, is going to send his son back to school or if he even cares about the boy. According to his niece, he only cares about money and himself.
                  We are not now that strength which in old days
                  Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                  Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                  To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Surrey View Post
                    On line education is a poor substitute for real schooling as some of the links I have posted from various child psychologists show.
                    It is not perfect. Also there is a difference between on-line education and fully interactive (like Zoom or ) education. Here they used interactive systems so teacher could discuss matters with the students and so on.
                    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Massena View Post

                      Yes, it is. But if it is run in the right way, it can be beneficial. My son is in his first year of college and is taking his courses on line. He had a hard time transitioning, but he had the self-discipline to get it done.

                      And if the alternative is getting sick and possibly dying from the virus, then there is no choice in the matter.

                      I got my masters on line and it was both interesting and beneficial (as well as expensive) and was well worth the effort.

                      Friends of mine who are teachers are nervous about going back and afraid of getting sick-and many parents are concerned about their childrens' health.

                      Our county made the decision to have two days attending regular classes and three on line. We'll see how that works out.

                      I wonder if Trump, for all his demagoguery and bluster, as well as making his usual 'decrees' on the subject, is going to send his son back to school or if he even cares about the boy. According to his niece, he only cares about money and himself.
                      If you do even a small amount of research you will know that the odds of your son getting seriously sick from COVID are tiny and of dying are minute. Far more likely to hurt himself falling down the stairs in your house. We all face risks when we go outside of the house. We could get knocked over by a car, struck by lightning, mugged, a plane could crash on us etc.

                      I did a masters via distance learning but we are not talking about adults we are talking about children. My daughter age five has gone back to school. I have no concern regarding the Covid risk because I took the time to do the research and found out that the risk is insignificant compared to the normal everyday risks that we face by merely walking down the street. On the overhand the cost to her in lost education would be very real and potentially long lasting. So a microscopic risk from Covid vs the certain cost of lost education. I know which one I would chose.

                      "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                        If you do even a small amount of research you will know that the odds of your son getting seriously sick from COVID are tiny and of dying are minute. Far more likely to hurt himself falling down the stairs in your house. We all face risks when we go outside of the house. We could get knocked over by a car, struck by lightning, mugged, a plane could crash on us etc.

                        I did a masters via distance learning but we are not talking about adults we are talking about children. My daughter age five has gone back to school. I have no concern regarding the Covid risk because I took the time to do the research and found out that the risk is insignificant compared to the normal everyday risks that we face by merely walking down the street. On the overhand the cost to her in lost education would be very real and potentially long lasting. So a microscopic risk from Covid vs the certain cost of lost education. I know which one I would chose.
                        Thirty percent of the sick in Florida are 18 and under. Please try and keep up. And take your own advice and 'do even a small amount of research.'

                        And education won't be lost, merely delayed. What has to be addressed first is the pandemic.

                        And school-age children can infect their parents and grand parents...

                        To continue downplaying the seriousness and risks of the pandemic is not only dangerous, but it is misrepresenting the pandemic.
                        We are not now that strength which in old days
                        Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                        Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                        To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Surrey View Post
                          If you do even a small amount of research you will know that the odds of your son getting seriously sick from COVID are tiny and of dying are minute. Far more likely to hurt himself falling down the stairs in your house. We all face risks when we go outside of the house. We could get knocked over by a car, struck by lightning, mugged, a plane could crash on us etc.

                          I did a masters via distance learning but we are not talking about adults we are talking about children. My daughter age five has gone back to school. I have no concern regarding the Covid risk because I took the time to do the research and found out that the risk is insignificant compared to the normal everyday risks that we face by merely walking down the street. On the overhand the cost to her in lost education would be very real and potentially long lasting. So a microscopic risk from Covid vs the certain cost of lost education. I know which one I would chose.
                          If the discussion was only about schoolkids life, then i would agree. Since the odds indeed are that small. However the issue is not limited to the schoolkid's life but also potential long term effects, life and long term health effects of other schoolkids, teachers, school staff, parent and families of other schoolkids... Which makes it quite a bit more complex issue (Israeli example shows that schoolkids can spread the disease despite of the lack of symptoms). Because of that if there is an option to have interactive remote learning with video streams then i would go with video streams until the such time that the overall risk can be reduced (rate of infection is lower).
                          It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Massena View Post

                            Thirty percent of the sick in Florida are 18 and under. Please try and keep up. And take your own advice and 'do even a small amount of research.'

                            And education won't be lost, merely delayed. What has to be addressed first is the pandemic.

                            And school-age children can infect their parents and grand parents...

                            To continue downplaying the seriousness and risks of the pandemic is not only dangerous, but it is misrepresenting the pandemic.
                            I have shown plenty of links showing that children suffer from Covid much less than adults. The only people who are significantly vulnerable are the elderly or those with serious underlying conditions.

                            Florida kids aren't any different to children elsewhere.
                            "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                              If the discussion was only about schoolkids life, then i would agree. Since the odds indeed are that small. However the issue is not limited to the schoolkid's life but also potential long term effects, life and long term health effects of other schoolkids, teachers, school staff, parent and families of other schoolkids... Which makes it quite a bit more complex issue (Israeli example shows that schoolkids can spread the disease despite of the lack of symptoms). Because of that if there is an option to have interactive remote learning with video streams then i would go with video streams until the such time that the overall risk can be reduced (rate of infection is lower).
                              As I have said the flu can very rarely cause long term effects. That is considered an acceptable risk. We do not close schools every winter. None of the children in my daughters class caught Covid since they went back to school. Or at least reported as such. Nore did any of the teachers.

                              "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                                I have shown plenty of links showing that children suffer from Covid much less than adults. The only people who are significantly vulnerable are the elderly or those with serious underlying conditions.

                                Florida kids aren't any different to children elsewhere.
                                The information on the thirty percent of those newly infected in Florida being 18 and under was from yesterday. Your information is out of date and now irrelevant.
                                We are not now that strength which in old days
                                Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                                Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                                To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X