Covid cases, hospitalizations, death trends and other touchy subjects…

[ttribe]

31 minutes ago, pogi said:

But of course, your school district is having no impact on this whatsoever, as they close their eyes to the outside world. 

It doesn't appear that they are tracking, or at least reporting, total cases over time - only active cases.  

 

He's not in a state school district.  He's at a charter school and one known for its rather conservative political leanings, at that.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, rongo said:

ch has already been written about the CDC’s willful decision to ignore the relevance of prior infection, as if natural immunity simply did not exist . . . So - what does the science say? It says: barring new evidence, there is no clear benefit to immunizing those with confirmed prior infection.

Does he give studies showing this?

[Calm]

The Blue Zone ideas sound great to me.  And the successes are very encouraging if the data is accurate. 
 

https://www.bchd.org/beach-cities-successes

Rongo, would you be for a soda tax or other highly sweetened, caloric dense foods to be taxed in order to support Blue Zone initiative?  
 

 

Edited August 23, 2021 by Calm

[rongo]

32 minutes ago, ttribe said:

He's not in a state school district.  He's at a charter school and one known for its rather conservative political leanings, at that.

We are a charter district of 12,000 students in 10 schools (larger than many public districts). Charter schools are publicly funded like public districts, but have more freedom (I like to call it "freedom to" and "freedom from") and fewer restrictions than public districts. We are also funded higher per pupil because we don't have the ability to raise property taxes via bonds and overrides. 

 

[ttribe]

14 minutes ago, rongo said:

We are a charter district of 12,000 students in 10 schools (larger than many public districts). Charter schools are publicly funded like public districts, but have more freedom (I like to call it "freedom to" and "freedom from") and fewer restrictions than public districts. We are also funded higher per pupil because we don't have the ability to raise property taxes via bonds and overrides.

I know how charter schools are funded.  Thanks for the unnecessary lesson, though.

[rongo]

19 minutes ago, Calm said:

The Blue Zone ideas sound great to me.  And the successes are very encouraging if the data is accurate. 
 

https://www.bchd.org/beach-cities-successes

Rongo, would you be for a soda tax or other highly sweetened, caloric dense foods to be taxed in order to support Blue Zone initiative?  

Knee-jerk, I would say no, but I might be changing on that. Obesity is such a major problem, and it impacts so many other things. Still, I hesitate to have the government regulate things. As the doctor said, the comorbidities (obesity, smoking/vaping, profound pre-existing health issues, etc.) are the real drivers as far as who is going to get hit really hard and struggle in the hospital with Covid (and many other things). Insulin dependent Type I diabetes is one thing (not lifestyle-related), but areas where people are at fault through their lifestyle choice is something else. 

Would I want to see "lifestyle taxes" on high fructose corn syrup, pop, etc., like cigarette taxes to pay for impact on the health care system? Mostly no, but like I said, I might be changing on that. It would be like a "use tax" or tolls, in a way. But then, relying on the government to actually put it towards the health care system would be like expecting IDOT to put Chicago toll road revenue towards road maintenance.  

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, rongo said:

Insulin dependent Type I diabetes is one thing (not lifestyle-related), but areas where people are at fault through their lifestyle choice is something else. 

Obesity isn’t always a lifestyle choice though. People with sleep disorders are much more prone to obesity and other disorders and diseases at least in part to the lower quality of sleep slowing healing. Chronic depression may also lead obesity in part due to the neurochemicals that control satiation are imbalanced.   And then there is the tendency of many medications to cause weight gain…when one has to choose to being able to function and being a healthy weight, there isn’t really much of a choice especially if you are a caregiver/provider to others. 
 

But I agree our culture promotes excessiveness, restaurants offering supersized meals and such should be taxed or something else be done to discourage the practice Imo and money should be put into preventative health initiatives including nutrition classes at least by high school and healthier meals through school programs. Vending machines on school property should not be allowed to offer sweets, high fats with low nutrition value, and sodas. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

But I agree our culture promotes excessiveness, restaurants offering supersized meals and such should be taxed or something else be done to discourage the practice Imo and money should be put into preventative health initiatives including nutrition classes at least by high school and healthier meals through school programs. Vending machines on school property should not be allowed to offer sweets, high fats with low nutrition value, and sodas. 

I think that schools, especially high schools, should be able to offer those kinds of snacks on campus, as long as they aren't the only kinds of snacks.  The meals schools offer now, since the "health" changes are abysmal and a lot of kids are going hungry.  And diet and low cal/no fat foods are often not that healthy for you either, just in a different way. 

Until we can offer a better caliber of food at school I don't think banning high calorie food is the answer. 

But I don't think that taxing restaurants that offer large sized meals would work.  They would pass the tax on to the customers who are very likely to pay it,  Supersized meals at places like mcdonalds already cost more than the regular ones, and that doesn't stop people from ordering them.  It's the healthy food that is usually the most expensive and that's probably one (though certainly not the only) reason they don't sell as well.

[rongo]

This wouldn't go anywhere politically, but I would like to see SNAP (food stamps) only cover WIC items (staples: bread, meat, fruit and vegetables, milk, cheese, etc.). No chips, no pop, no Hostess, no energy drinks. 

Granted, some of the poor don't know how to cook; all they've ever known is pre-packaged and junk food. But at least the free government food could only be nutritious. Just like with food orders (ideally), education on how to better prepare the food available should be a part of the federal assistance. 

[Calm]

25 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The meals schools offer now, since the "health" changes are abysmal and a lot of kids are going hungry.

This is a real shame because healthy meals can be very tasty..,yeah, if it is not working, offering the poorer quality food is better than kids going hungry. 

There needs to be a whole attitude change with the training of nutritionists and cooks preparing the meals to incentives for kids willing to experiment with new tastes.  I would love to see healthy cooking being a required class in high school, but you would need teachers who knew what they were doing to teach it. I learned how to make a baked Alaska in my home ec class. All my other cooking skills came from watching my mom, who was a self trained gourmet healthy food cook, though we probably got a bit too much of meat because Dad was a meat and potato guy, but at least it was very high quality, lean protein; our lunches would most often be oranges and carrots and sliced roast beef on whole grain bread where she would cook the roast herself, not deli meat; she should have invested in a meat slicer as at times there was way too much meat in them for me.  

Quote

But I don't think that taxing restaurants that offer large sized meals would work.  

More likely not, but I can dream.   

Edited August 24, 2021 by Calm

[rongo]

Just now, Calm said:

This is a real shame because healthy meals can be very tasty..,yeah, if it is not working, offering the poorer quality food is better than kids going hungry. 

The amount of thrown away, unused food at schools is appalling (milk, fruit, etc.). I've been told that the law prohibits food banks and other entities from collecting it; it has to be thrown away. 

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, rongo said:

The amount of thrown away, unused food at schools is appalling (milk, fruit, etc.). I've been told that the law prohibits food banks and other entities from collecting it; it has to be thrown away. 

We are such a wasteful society. No doubt that is to provide protection, but it comes across as penny wise pound foolish type of behaviour. Easier to trash than pay for and supervise safe handouts. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, rongo said:

That's how it's been forever. If people/kids are sick enough, they stay home. If it's a matter of a sore throat, slight fever, malaise, etc., many people do (and always have) come to school.

Not if they're following your school's Illness Policy:

Quote

To minimize the spread of contagious disease we ask that each morning prior to bringing your student to school you do the following: Take your child’s temperature, look for signs of being ill such as: being more tired than usual, sluggish, fever, chills, headache, complaints of sore throat, congestion or runny nose, new onset of cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, nausea, vomiting or diarrhea, chest pain, aching joints and/or muscles, loss or change in smell and taste, and any new unidentified rashes. Please do not send your student to school if they have any of these symptoms.

 

5 hours ago, rongo said:

Our policy is that quarantining is a family determination. If your child is sick, keep them home. If they feel well enough to go back, send them back. If you feel they should be quarantined, quarantine them (those would be the reported positive tests).

That's not actually your policy either:

Quote

Students and staff being treated for COVID-19 may not return to school until

• a minimum of 10 days from the onset of the illness has passed and
• they have been symptom free without use medications for 24 hours and
• they have been cleared by their licensed medical provider and/or public county health representative.

 

[rongo]

44 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Not if they're following your school's Illness Policy:

That's not actually your policy either:

It's like the Church's official policies and guidance on masks and vaccines and church/temple attendance, and how those policies are implemented in practice: written policy is one thing, but at the end of the day, it's up to the individual. That's as it should be. 

It's been made clear to us that it is parents' call (as it has always been, pre-Covid) as to when and how long to keep their children out of school. If a kid is hacking up a lung or vomiting at school, then of course the nurse is going to send the student home and tell the parents to leave them home for the days spelled out in the policy. Just like at church, we don't have Grand Inquisitors grilling students on whether they are **really** well enough to be there; we trust that they and their parents have done their due diligence and get on with teaching our classes and doing our campus life. Just like pre-Covid. I haven't seen any sick kids in my sphere of influence, though (none of the three reported cases are my students; teachers and parents are notified if someone who reported testing positive sits near their children). If a parent reports to the school that their child tested positive, then I'm sure the policy kicks in and that student is going to be out for the specified number of days. 

[rongo]

5 hours ago, pogi said:

This is mandated by the health department.  If schools knowingly allow students to attend class who by law should be on quarantine or isolation, then that is another ethical violation, and puts them at risk for liability issues and law suits.  Not the brightest idea.  Here in Utah, the health department has school liaisons assigned to specific schools to assist in isolation/quarantine measures as positive cases are identified via testing.

We're not as rigid on this as Utah. Our county is also not as rigid on it as Maricopa County (the large one with the Phoenix Metropolitan area and suburbs). 

We're not "knowingly" allowing students to attend sick unless . . . they tell us they are sick. We rely on parents reporting. None of my students has told me, "I really shouldn't be here, because I'm sick, but I came anyway." 

5 hours ago, pogi said:

 No, it is not a family determination.  It is required by law, and is not determined by "if they feel well enough to go back, send them back".  

Even in more rigid systems, it still is the family who reports it. What is a school supposed to do if the family says nothing? Maybe in other places, positive test results are reported to the schools? 

 

5 hours ago, pogi said:

How is a parent supposed to know if their child was sitting next to a positive case?  Does the school notify them, or is that left up to the health department?   

Yes, parents are notified if someone in seating chart proximity (6 ft. radius) to their child tested positive. Even in that case, the decision to quarantine is left up to the parents; it is not an automatic precautionary quarantine (this is different from many other school districts). 

5 hours ago, pogi said:

It doesn't appear that they are tracking, or at least reporting, total cases over time - only active cases.  

I don't understand what else you think a school should report other than "active cases" (known positive cases among their student bodies at that time). Are you saying schools should post how many Covid students they have had since March 2020? 

[Hamba Tuhan]

28 minutes ago, rongo said:

Written policy is one thing, but at the end of the day, it's up to the individual. That's as it should be. 

This reminds me of those who, on this forum in the past, have advocated for a wink-and-nod approach to other Church policies, such as who qualifies for a temple recommend. You are right of course that, in cases regarding the Church, it is 'up to the individual'. We have almost no mechanism for requiring people to not take Church policies lightly or respond to them dishonestly.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

This reminds me of those who, on this forum in the past, have advocated for a wink-and-nod approach to other Church policies, such as who qualifies for a temple recommend. You are right of course that, in all cases regarding the Church, it is 'up to the individual'.

So what are you advocating for as applied to schools? Should we threaten students to fess up and admit that they are there under false pretenses? Should we screech at them that our dashboard's reported numbers are so far below what we know they should be, that they are lying?

All policies give guidance and recommendations --- sometimes sternly stated. But, even the state and county departments of health rely on self-reporting (or hospital visits). I don't think schools anywhere are notified if their students happen to test positive somewhere. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

So what are you advocating for as applied to schools?

As applied to schools, nothing. As applied to families and individuals, everything good in the Church and the broader world depends in large part on people sincerely striving to be honest in all that they do. That's all I'm advocating for.

You and I both know that some people aren't honest and consider clearly stated policies to be nothing more than diplomatically phrased suggestions that they can flout at will. I don't have to like that, and I certainly don't have to like it when fellow Saints defend that approach and/or adopt it as their own.

Quote

I don't think schools anywhere are notified if their students happen to test positive somewhere. 

Schools where I live certainly are. In fact, if I'm at a shopping centre at the same time as someone who later tests positive, I will be personally notified. Depending on the nature of the exposure, I may also be required to isolate and be tested.

[pogi]

11 hours ago, rongo said:

We're not as rigid on this as Utah. Our county is also not as rigid on it as Maricopa County (the large one with the Phoenix Metropolitan area and suburbs). 

We're not "knowingly" allowing students to attend sick unless . . . they tell us they are sick. We rely on parents reporting. None of my students has told me, "I really shouldn't be here, because I'm sick, but I came anyway." 

You mentioned that kids are coming to school sick.  If you are not "knowingly" allowing students to attend sick, then how do you know kids are coming to school sick?  If it is that obvious, shouldn't the school nurse be notified and sending them home?

11 hours ago, rongo said:

Even in more rigid systems, it still is the family who reports it. What is a school supposed to do if the family says nothing? Maybe in other places, positive test results are reported to the schools? 

If positive cases are not reported to schools, and isolation/quarantine measures are not implemented, then that is a major failure of your health department. 

11 hours ago, rongo said:

Yes, parents are notified if someone in seating chart proximity (6 ft. radius) to their child tested positive. Even in that case, the decision to quarantine is left up to the parents; it is not an automatic precautionary quarantine (this is different from many other school districts). 

So, your district is knowingly disregarding the law mandated by your health department in regards to quarantining close contacts?  Again, that is a huge liability risk and lawsuit waiting to happen.  This is going to sound snarky, but I honestly don't see how this can be justified - does your school also disregard other health department safety codes with food safety, building safety codes, etc., or do they just ignore the ones related to a deadly pandemic that is overwhelming the hospital system?

11 hours ago, rongo said:

I don't understand what else you think a school should report other than "active cases" (known positive cases among their student bodies at that time). Are you saying schools should post how many Covid students they have had since March 2020? 

I don't think that is the responsibility of the school to publish that data, although they should be tracking it - and it would be the integrous thing to do.  I think the county should be tracking and reporting those numbers - parents deserve to know. 

Edited August 24, 2021 by pogi

[Rain]

 

18 hours ago, pogi said:

You mentioned that kids are coming to school sick.  If you are not "knowingly" allowing students to attend sick, then how do you know kids are coming to school sick?  If it is that obvious, shouldn't the school nurse be notified and sending them home?

If positive cases are not reported to schools, and isolation/quarantine measures are not implemented, then that is a major failure of your health department. 

So, your district is knowingly disregarding the law mandated by your health department in regards to quarantining close contacts? 

There is a lot of disregarding the law or orders going on now in Arizona, though some is is in the opposite direction.

18 hours ago, pogi said:

Again, that is a huge liability risk and lawsuit waiting to happen.  This is going to sound snarky, but I honestly don't see how this can be justified - does your school also disregard other health department safety codes with food safety, building safety codes, etc., or do they just ignore the ones related to a deadly pandemic that is overwhelming the hospital system?

I don't think that is the responsibility of the school to publish that data, although they should be tracking it - and it would be the integrous thing to do.  I think the county should be tracking and reporting those numbers - parents deserve to know. 

 

Edited August 25, 2021 by Rain

[Peacefully]

Just some food for thought from someone on the front lines:
 

https://www.deseret.com/utah/2021/8/21/22629868/doctor-who-treated-covid-patients-signed-dozens-death-certificates-has-message-vaccination?_hsmi=151660514&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8NkgPUvkKOuiI1gg7f1H1uAfE7BUzPp3Np02jsaKNYRhAyZ4TLmMOB9fGbyxCAjyqct-WV6jwZbN_lhMFjIZnaBXmMNg&fbclid=IwAR2tLAjPIMy-iM9V-D7_-kocIn1M-A3AY_ln-3wWWasF-LVOUOrSD8_Kohc

[Bernard Gui]

On 8/23/2021 at 9:45 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Not if they're following your school's Illness Policy:

 

That's not actually your policy either:

 

Our state tracks proximity. Our grandson just received a notice that he was within six feet of a person diagnosed with COVID, so he and about 60 other kids are quarantined until the first week of September. Makes it a bit awkward since we are living with his family for a while. 

[Bernard Gui]

On 8/23/2021 at 10:46 PM, rongo said:

Even in more rigid systems, it still is the family who reports it. What is a school supposed to do if the family says nothing? Maybe in other places, positive test results are reported to the schools? 

Yep. Here they track contact and take unilateral action for quarantining school kids. Happened tomour grandson yesterday.

[ttribe]

8 hours ago, Rain said:

There is a lot of disregarding the law or orders going on now in Arizona, though some is is in the opposite direction.

Ducey's stupid "No Mask Mandates" order should be disregarded, with impunity.

[rongo]

15 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Ducey's stupid "No Mask Mandates" order should be disregarded, with impunity.

Well, it isn't just Ducey --- it was a bill signed into law. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, happens after September 28 (when a judge said is the earliest the ban on mask mandates can kick in). It will also be interesting to see if Ducey's $163 million for schools without mask mandates (excluding districts that have imposed one) holds up. 

My local district where I live is considering a mask mandate tonight, but the "tea leaves" say that they will vote 4-1 to keep masking parental choice. The mandate under consideration would include a parent opt-out (non waiver), so it's essentially a symbolic act only (which is true of other district mandates, too, in my opinion). 

As far as local school boards go, there is a real chance in many places of people losing elections or being recalled over this issue, so that is in the back of politicians' minds.