Are you asking a "yes/no" question? Because the answer is "no" if you are. Are you asking a rhetorical question because that's different. It's a little odd how you combine questions with assumptions though. - ThreadSky

jasonandrade.bsky.social • 84 days ago

Are you asking a "yes/no" question? Because the answer is "no" if you are.

Are you asking a rhetorical question because that's different.

It's a little odd how you combine questions with assumptions though.

Comments

sinerising.bsky.social•81 days ago

Because how dare people have kids and send them to school, right?

What a heartless response.

jasonandrade.bsky.social•81 days ago

I think people should in fact send their kids to school.

Why you think the opposite or how that is heartless is beyond me.

It sounds like you didn’t read the article or you apparently disagree with it?

🤷🏾

sinerising.bsky.social•81 days ago

Try again. This is a massive FU to parents, even presuming the thesis of the article is correct.

nudl.bsky.social•84 days ago

This is a follow up question based on the article’s discussion of how there are health risks associated with COVID infection in adults (which increase with age), but low risk for kids. It could still be worth mitigating spread in children to decrease the viral reservoir which will infect adults.

jasonandrade.bsky.social•84 days ago

There's a question there and there's an assumption there. The answer to one may invalidate the other.

I'm not an epidemiologist (and I don't play one on the internet) but perhaps think about the actual cost and means of "mitigating spread" as a starting point.

ZeroCovid isn't sensible or real.

sinerising.bsky.social•81 days ago

In another age, you'd also be saying "Zero Cholera isn't sensible or real".

And yet, here we are.

nudl.bsky.social•83 days ago

The assumption is one made by the article, that’s why I’m asking the author of the article a follow up question related to the assumption he made.

Decreasing disease burden != Zero Covid. We can still consider improving air filtration in schools as well as other measures to mitigate illness spread.

jasonandrade.bsky.social•83 days ago

Where the question is asked and answered and there’s already plenty of material available that goes into this detail.. it’s very much in ZeroCovid areas.

“Decreasing disease burden” is a very broad statement which no one could possibly disagree with except with specific proposals. 🤷🏾

jasonandrade.bsky.social•83 days ago

You can “consider” a proposal but you can consider it forever without a process.

Victoria put this into practice and where are the results from their implementation of clean air in schools?

You should be asking the Victorian government questions to release the data and report?

jasonandrade.bsky.social•83 days ago

They’ve spent $190m to start with and the current program has cost $20m and runs to the end of 2025.

How is that working? Where’s the reporting and data?

https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/following-three-vs-safe-return-school

gidmk.bsky.social•83 days ago

I recommended improving airflow in daycare in the article. Did you read it?

nudl.bsky.social•83 days ago

Yes. My question is should we be pushing to decrease COVID in kids specifically to protect adults? Even if kids are fine, are you concerned about their parents? I mean this as a genuine question.

gidmk.bsky.social•83 days ago

Not really. Parents of young kids are generally low-risk, and even large reductions in the under 5s would have fairly minimal impact on the risk of their parents catching COVID-19 given the high population burden.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply