Which wins in this circumstance: interest or well-roundedness? What would you do if a historical time period was covered thoroughly one year, and your child absolutely loves this subject and really wants to study the same time period the next year? This would include switching from upper elementary resources to middle school resources, so it would be covered much deeper. Would you cover the same historical time period since she is excited about this subject, or would you move on to another time period for the sake of well-roundedness? Or would you do some of both? Thanks!

Thanks for sharing this. I loved it. I got to see Sierra Hull at the Ryman once. She's amazing!

I saw this news today regarding a German study. https://slippedisc.com/2020/05/two-munich-scientists-pronounce-singing-to-be-covid-safe/ I am not advocating that this study means singing is safe. I just saw it and thought someone might want to look into it.

I don't have all the answers, but wouldn't a complete abolishing of police lead to much more vigilante "justice," like in the case of Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia? I could be wrong about this, but it seems like this would be even worse than the real problems that we are facing today.

The CDC considers it to be extremely rare, but I know a young friend in her twenties who is now infertile after the shot. She basically went through premature menopause when she was a teenager. It was extremely difficult for her.

If you have been here a long time you must already be aware of the education boards, so I am not really sure why that has been brought up. I agree with everything you said. I always regret it when I venture into a non-educational thread (and some educational threads). It is sad, and I agree that the support for others and others' viewpoints is largely absent. I know that I get caught up in it and am sure that I am guilty of this as well. I also agree with what you said about not having a politician that speaks for me. I regret how everything must be made political these days. I really miss having a place where a homeschool mom can be unapologetically pro-homeschooling. I miss the old Homeschool Reviews site, too. Times have changed, but I haven't changed with them.

We had a hard rain this afternoon and a beautiful rainbow as the sun was going down. We enjoyed it so much, I just felt like sharing.

I really appreciate you saying this! It's actually pretty hard to find many formal studies that prove that cloth masks are effective in the way that they're being used today. That does not prove at all that this means that they're not, but there hasn't been much time for investigation on this particular question. I imagine this will change soon though.

But I was supplying information to someone who specifically asked for studies that indicated that masks weren't effective. I would rather know the truth than win the argument, but I understand why you would think that.

I can't really agree with this conclusion regarding it being useless, although I respect your opinion that it is. I think that all study of this type is useful, and adds to our knowledge base. I hope they do much, much more of it. Also, this tends to be a really emotional topic right now more than just a scientific one, and I get that.

I also find it extremely interesting that there was virus detected on the outside surfaces of the mask in all cases, but in three-fourths of the cases (surgical and cloth), none was detected for the inner surfaces of the masks. I hope that they continue to do more tests like this.

That's an excellent point. https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/52/3/177/312528#203384098 Here's an earlier study which measured "normal breathing, deep breathing, turning head side to side, moving head up and down, talking, grimace, bending over and returning to normal breathing. Earlier studies have shown that the protection levels determined using the set of exercises included in the OSHA protocol highly correlated with the actual exposures from a simulated health-care workplace study." For reference, the size of of the COVID-19 particles are 0.12 μm. Conclusion: "Most of the tested N95 respirators and surgical masks in this study were observed to perform at their worst against particles approximately between 0.04 and 0.2 μm, which includes the sizes of coronavirus and influenza virus. The tested N95 respirators provided about 8–12 times better protection than the surgical masks..." The above study is for N95 respirators and surgical masks and not homemade cloth masks. So my tone is clear, I'm offering this for further information and not to be argumentative. :) (Edited because I left out the link to the study.)

There is some recent research evaluating effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in filtering SARS–CoV-2 specifically. I found it in the Annals of Internal Medicine. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342 "In conclusion, both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface."

I agree with others who have refrained from the store shoppers. I have used them a couple of times in the past (like when I was sick) but have not done so at all during the quarantine. I know that my parents, other elderly friends, and one young friend with a heart condition make use of the local store shoppers. I am thankful that they have this option. I feel strongly that those slots should be reserved for those who are at a high risk. I am not judging able-bodied people who are using that service, but I would not feel comfortable using it when I know that there are many more people in my community at much higher risk than I am.

Exactly! It's so obvious to us, but (taking out the D and R and looking at all respondents to the question), only 37% are able to think rationally about this question. Question: How would the following developments impact your interest in taking a coronavirus/COVID19 vaccine, if at all?...President Trump says the vaccine is safe: All respondents: More interested 14% Less interested 36% No more or no less interested 37% Not sure 13%

This recent poll by Reuters/Ipsos reminded me of some of the things being discussed here regarding the politicizing of things that aren't inherently political (like medications). Question: How would the following developments impact your interest in taking a coronavirus/COVID19 vaccine, if at all?...President Trump says the vaccine is safe: More interested: Republicans 26% No more or no less interested: Democrats 26%; Republicans 51% Less interested: Democrats 55% https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2020-05/writeup_reuters_2020_coronavirus_vaccine_05_21_2020.pdf There are several other equally interesting responses in this survey. I think it's a regrettable development in our culture that seemingly everything has to be politicized these days.

I think he is making this about him when it is not. I mean this gently, but his reaction is kind of self-centered. We have one set of grandparents, and it is important for them that we stay connected with them. They are keeping their distance from others. But they want us near them. This is important to them. They are not interacting this way with us because they are reckless and do not care for our health or well-being or for their own. The other set of grandparents wants to keep their distance from us right now. They do not want us near them. They are not doing this because they don't love or care about us. Let them make their own decisions. They are theirs to make. I think he should stop making this about him.

This is not really an anti-vaccination study. In fact the results for interference were mostly positive or neutral, but specifically for coronaviruses (in general) the interference was harmful according to this study (1.36). You're right about COVID-19, and that is why I specifically stated that it was prior to the outbreak and that I am hopeful that more study will be done. I hope this clears up the confusion.

A recent study with the DOD showed that the flu vaccine may increase the risk of coronavirus. (This is not necessarily and not specifically COVID-19 but coronavirus in general. This study was completed previous to the COVID-19 outbreak. More studies need to be done.) "...the odds of both coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher when compared to unvaccinated individuals (OR = 1.36 and 1.51, respectively)." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X19313647?via%3Dihub#!

If TT is working for them, and you are just wanting to use something non-computer based, you could just use the actual textbooks with TT instead of the computer version. Initially, this was how that program worked. The material is taught in the textbooks.

One interesting huge difference from today is that President Woodrow Wilson didn't even release a statement about the flu. The federal government did next to nothing. It was a different time.

There was the example where CBS had to admit that they used footage from an overcrowded Italian hospital when reporting on the conditions in hospitals in NY. https://nypost.com/2020/04/01/cbs-admits-to-using-footage-from-italy-in-report-about-nyc/ They said it was "an editing mistake." Somebody probably just got caught over-sensationalizing. But I've already admitted that I think sensationalizing the news is just an acknowledged part of the news business model. So things like this don't surprise me.

Yes, I totally agree with this. This is probably true for most states. This is even more true when we are talking about what is happening with the virus in the U.S. as a whole. New York looks a lot different than Montana. But the point is that the new models from IHME are showing drastic improvement from its previous projections for Tennessee. These are just the projections that the state and federal officials are using. But I hope that this is a sign of better things ahead than were expected for Tennessee. Projected peak deaths per day in Tennessee: Earlier estimate (made on April 2): 165 per day Updated projection (made on April 5): 25 per day Total deaths for Tennessee: Earlier estimate: 3,422 total deaths Updated projection: 587 total deaths Hospital bed use: Earlier estimate: 15,618 hospital beds and 2,428 ICU beds Updated projection: 1,232 hospital beds and 245 ICU beds. Ventilators required: Earlier estimate: 1,943 ventilators Updated projection: 208 ventilators

The recent models out of Tennessee are looking a lot better now. The graph below shows the projected peak needs and what is available. Something not on the chart below is 800-900 ventilators available corresponding to 208 as the projected need. I pray that the models prove to be accurate (or that even fever resources will be needed). https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/tennessee