Jump to content

Menu

At what point would you lock down again?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Acadie said:

My 20 yo vaccinated niece (J&J) is really sick right now. Fever, severe sore throat, can't eat or drink without numbing throat spray, starting oral steroids because her tonsils were so swollen they almost touch. Rapid and long strep tests negative, and she's being tested for Covid and mono at her primary care doc today. Of course symptoms began over the weekend. Don't get me started that neither of two CVS Minute Clinics nor urgent care tested her for Covid before--she passed out in the aisle of one CVS and they gave her juice and had her call a friend for a ride home. 

 

I was sick like that with mono in the 9th grade!!  I have never been that sick in my life and I'm now 54.  It was horrible.  But...there are meds for that if that is what she has.  Did they do the rapid mono test?  I mean, mine showed up instantly, but they sent it off for testing also.  My throat almost closed on me.

ETA:  I was out of school for a month with this!  My cousin's daughter in Denver has mono and is really sick.  She just graduated from high school.

Edited by mlktwins
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My boys started summer swim team and will be doing year round swim starting in September.  We quit last year because we were caring for 3 elderly.  Two of them are gone now and my dad is vaccinated and playing cards and bingo with all the old folks at his apartment building so I'm not going to keep us locked down if he isn't locked down 🙂.  The boys are also heading back to in-person local classes 3 days a week in the fall.  That being said, they will be wearing masks to their classes, we don't go to indoor places without masks, we don't eat inside restaurants, etc.  They did go to a movie this weekend, but it wasn't crowded and they wore masks.  After being locked down for a year, I want them to do some fun things with their friends and their friends are careful too - they are all vaccinated.  And...our year round swim team kept going last year and I could see all the protocols and the care they took with the swimmers at practices and meets.  I can't take that away from them again.  Their volunteer positions will continue as virtual because the library they work at is getting a big 6 month + renovation.  They may go back in the spring or next summer.

Would love a big vacay somewhere, but not doing that either.  We are renting a house near a lake and going to have a wonderfully quiet time.  We just need to get away from here for a bit after the year we've had.  Change of scenery. 

I'm also checking my inventories again to make sure we are good - cleaning supplies, etc.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Acadie said:

With the sprinkler question, could you bring a few washable cloth masks to the playground, switch them out as they get wet, and wash the whole batch when you get home? 

My 20 yo vaccinated niece (J&J) is really sick right now. Fever, severe sore throat, can't eat or drink without numbing throat spray, starting oral steroids because her tonsils were so swollen they almost touch. Rapid and long strep tests negative, and she's being tested for Covid and mono at her primary care doc today. Of course symptoms began over the weekend. Don't get me started that neither of two CVS Minute Clinics nor urgent care tested her for Covid before--she passed out in the aisle of one CVS and they gave her juice and had her call a friend for a ride home. 

She's in MA, and I wonder if some clinicians in high vax/low case states are getting complacent, or just haven't seen Delta yet. 

It may not be Covid, but she did have exposure to a family whose teens had breakthrough cases (also J&J) and she should have been tested and treated as a potential Covid patient the first time she sought care. 

I'm shifting toward taking more precautions, while still doing things that we want to do. 

Sending some good thoughts to your niece.  I was sick like that 2 times.  One strep and one mono.  I hope she can get relief soon

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I think about: There is such a thing as post-viral syndrome following all sorts of viruses. And we have never had a very effective flu vaccine, or vaccines for most of the other viruses that regularly infect children. It’s an interesting rabbit hole for perspective for anyone concerned about long Covid in children.
 

Incidence in adults seems correlated with number and severity of symptoms, and symptoms in kids are most often mild or none.  Example: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01292-y

Studies on long Covid in children, for those that might not have seen them.

Australian study, posted in other threads.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00124-3/fulltext

UK study using Zoe app, also posted in other threads. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.05.21256649v1
 

Ciao Corona Swiss study, from earlier in thread. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.16.21257255v2


German study of adolescents: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.11.21257037v1.full

Quote

Backround Post-COVID19 complications such as pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome (PIMS) and Long-COVID19 move increasingly into focus, potentially causing more harm in this age group than the acute infection. To better understand the symptoms of long-COVID19 in adolescents and to distinguish infection-associated symptoms from pandemic-associated symptoms, we conducted a Long-COVID19 survey, comparing responses from seropositive and seronegative adolescents. To our knowledge, data of Long-COVID19 surveys with seronegative control groups have not been published yet.

Methods Since May 2020 students grade 8-12 in fourteen secondary schools in Eastern Saxony were enrolled in the SchoolCovid19 study. Seroprevalence was assessed via serial SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in all participants. Furthermore, during the March/April 2021 study visit all participants were asked to complete a 12 question Long-COVID19 survey regarding the occurrence and frequency of difficulties concentrating, memory loss, listlessness, headache, abdominal pain, myalgia/ arthralgia, fatigue, insomnia and mood (sadness, anger, happiness and tenseness).

Findings 1560 students with a median age of 15 years participated in this study. 1365 (88%) were seronegative, 188 (12%) were seropositive. Each symptom was present in at least 35% of the students within the last seven days before the survey. However, there was no statistical difference comparing the reported symptoms between seropositive students and seronegative students. Whether the infection was known or unknown to the participant did not influence the prevalence of symptoms.

Interpretation The lack of differences comparing the reported symptoms between seropositive and seronegative students suggests that Long-COVID19 might be less common than previously thought and emphasizing the impact of pandemic-associated symptoms regarding the well-being and mental health of young adolescents.

 


Not long Covid, but death risk, in UK as in US, primarily in those with underlying health conditions. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-57766717
 

Quote

Scientists from University College London, and the Universities of York, Bristol and Liverpool say their studies of children are the most comprehensive yet anywhere in the world. 

They checked England's public health data and found most of the young people who had died of Covid-19 had underlying health conditions:

Around 15 had life-limiting or underlying conditions, including 13 living with complex neuro-disabilities

Six had no underlying conditions recorded in the last five years - though researchers caution some illnesses may have been missed 

A further 36 children had a positive Covid test at the time of their death but died from other causes, the analysis suggests

Though the overall risks were still low, children and young people who died were more likely to be over the age of 10 and of Black and Asian ethnicity.

Researchers estimate that 25 deaths in a population of some 12 million children in England gives a broad, overall mortality rate of 2 per million children.

 


 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are definitely not locking down unless we have to (legally).  I don't know how I would feel if my kids were too young to be vaccinated, but since the risk isn't high for young and healthy children anyway, I suspect that I would resume life and keep going just as we are now.  The emotional and mental toll has been huge for my kids so the risk would have to be bigger than that for me to consider locking down again. We are also not running out for a covid test for every sore throat and sniffle that comes our way. If someone gets very sick, they will get tested.  We will get flu shots in the fall.  We will, as we always have, try to avoid people who are sick and be considerate of others by staying home when we are sick.   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Penelope said:

Incidence in adults seems correlated with number and severity of symptoms, and symptoms in kids are most often mild or none.  Example: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01292-y

This seems to correlate to number more than severity? And also to specific symptoms like anosmia?

Edited by Not_a_Number
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Not to mention how many people, due to crappy healthcare coverage, don't KNOW if they have an underlying condition. 

  • Like 13
  • Thanks 4
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

I’m sorry. I’d feel frustrated in that situation, too.

We all do consider individual risk in deciding on activities for our own families, though. We aren’t in the same situation as March 2020. Play date with friends who are in danger? I would try to accommodate them. But continue to restrict the lives of all children in the same way as the last year, no. 

Edited by Penelope
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Penelope said:

I’m sorry. I’d feel frustrated in that situation, too.

We all do consider individual risk in deciding on activities for our own families, though. We aren’t in the same situation as March 2020. Play date with friends who are in danger? I would try to accommodate them. But continue to restrict the lives of all children in the same way as the last year, no. 

It's more decisions about group activities, public stuff, that is frustrating. Like Sunday School dropping masks, that kind of thing. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

This seems to correlate to number more than severity? And also to specific symptoms like anosmia?

Right, that’s not the only study, just one I saw and still had the link. I don’t know what to make of the anosmia connection, and there also are people who have anosmia and nothing else. That PHE link that Laura Corin shared the other day suggested that anosmia was less common in vaccinated breakthrough infections, which hopefully portends well for the chances of long Covid in the vaccinated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Not to mention how many people, due to crappy healthcare coverage, don't KNOW if they have an underlying condition. 

Since I just heard yesterday from friends that their very healthy absolutely no underlying conditions 24 year old son and 25 year old daughter now have long Covid (with heart issues and other problems that are not minor), this "it isn't dangerous for healthy kids" mantra is a big gamble. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

Since I just heard yesterday from friends that their very healthy absolutely no underlying conditions 24 year old son and 25 year old daughter now have long Covid (with heart issues and other problems that are not minor), this "it isn't dangerous for healthy kids" mantra is a big gamble. 

Yeah, a family at church had it and their elementary aged kid ended up in the hospital - no underlying conditions. I know we've had kids in the ICU with it recently here as well. And yet - masks optional. Which means a lot of us do have to lock down our kids. No longer are people masking in stores, at church, in sunday school, even regular schools. 

And positivity is over 12% in the county the church is in. 

Edited by ktgrok
  • Sad 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Not to mention how many people, due to crappy healthcare coverage, don't KNOW if they have an underlying condition. 


I know it makes me very unpopular to say this here, but if I had a kid with underlying condition, I’d be looking into things like ivermectin.   
 

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04425850

they got excellent results afaik

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pen said:


I know it makes me very unpopular to say this here, but if I had a kid with underlying condition, I’d be looking into things like ivermectin.   
 

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04425850

they got excellent results afaik

 

any idea why carageenan spray was used, in addition to  separate ivermectin drops? And how to know which did anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Not to mention how many people, due to crappy healthcare coverage, don't KNOW if they have an underlying condition. 

No, but like any other time, your child has different needs.  I'm sorry, but it never has and never will make sense for every child on the planet to socially distance for their whole lives because someone at the playground might have an unknown-to-others risk factor.

Maybe there should be special times at playgrounds when only high risk kids can play, like they have at grocery stores etc., or like they have sensory-friendly movies etc.  Because this is going to be long term, and even if it wasn't, there are other risks out there and always have been.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

any idea why carageenan spray was used, in addition to  separate ivermectin drops? And how to know which did anything?

Yes. 
 Carrageenan is supposed to help physically envelope the spike protein and to act as a physical barrier

Ivermectin has benefits once it (Virus or whatever ) gets internal with many studies showing that to be so, when used appropriately by people trying to help people (not for example if used at toxic doses or insufficient doses in studies that seemed set up to cause failure ... or studies set up with Hcq/zinc as comparison since both approaches are probably helpful. )

 

Iirc, Ivermectin alone seemed to reduce infection rates by 80 something percent 

Adding the carrageenan spray iirc they had no cases (Zero) in heavily exposed HCW worker test subjects as compared to a number of cases amongst the controls 

 

(I do not know of studies on carrageenan spray alone. It is in some spray formulas like I think some Betadine ones include Carrageenan. )

 

 

Edited by Pen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

No, but like any other time, your child has different needs.  I'm sorry, but it never has and never will make sense for every child on the planet to socially distance for their whole lives because someone at the playground might have an unknown-to-others risk factor.

Maybe there should be special times at playgrounds when only high risk kids can play, like they have at grocery stores etc., or like they have sensory-friendly movies etc.  Because this is going to be long term, and even if it wasn't, there are other risks out there and always have been.

Yeah, but in a few months most kids will at least be able to be vaccinated. Which will bring, hopefully, the rates down which makes it safer for vulnerable kids, vaccinated or not. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Yeah, but in a few months most kids will at least be able to be vaccinated. Which will bring, hopefully, the rates down which makes it safer for vulnerable kids, vaccinated or not. 

You live in Florida, right?  In a few months here, play-outside weather will be over until next May/June.

Last summer, they put crime tape over all the playground equipment so nobody could play at all.  Now kids have a few months to try to make up for not really being allowed to play at playgrounds since summer 2019.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Penelope said:

The virus isn’t going away, we will probably get exposed to it, and though it would be great if more adults would get vaccinated, there would not be “zero Covid” even if every single one went out and got the shot tomorrow.
 

We wouldn't get to zero Covid that way likely, at least not for a long time (I think we would eventually get there if all ages were vaccinated), but I see no reason Covid wouldn't be expected to become very rare, and realtively quickly, if every person went out and got vaccinated tomorrow. Breakthrough infection rate is low, and protection rate is high, so between the two of those, it would be extremely difficult for transmission chains not to be continually broken by finding no one to infect. How would that not result in an incredibly small number of infections? And number of deaths would be miniscule.

27 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Not to mention how many people, due to crappy healthcare coverage, don't KNOW if they have an underlying condition. 

I totally hear you. I have my own underlying condition, and the offhand way people dismiss Covid as no big deal and not worth measures to prevent because the hospitalization and death rate is low in young people with no underlying conditions is very frustrating.

4 minutes ago, Pen said:


I know it makes me very unpopular to say this here, but if I had a kid with underlying condition, I’d be looking into things like ivermectin.   
 

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04425850

they got excellent results afaik

 

I've still not heard any answers to why people who encourage everyone to take Ivermectin despite very little data that it is effective are at the same time usually the same people who go to great lengths to try to discourage people from getting vaccinated because they think the vaccine doesn't have enough data. 🤷‍♀️ We have an incredible amount of data showing the vaccine is extremely effective and serious side effects so rare that even in healthy kids, the risk of side effects from the vaccine is much lower than the risk from Covid itself. And in people 40 and above, you don't even need to be able to do math to see that that is the case.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should add, there is a big difference between zero Covid and over 10% positivity rates. When we got down to just under 4% I was positively giddy and ready to start doing outside stuff with the kids, etc. Now the county we do most stuff in is over 12%, and we have counties in the state over 20%. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

24 minutes ago, KSera said:

I've still not heard any answers to why people who encourage everyone to take Ivermectin despite very little data that it is effective are at the same time usually the same people who go to great lengths to try to discourage people from getting vaccinated because they think the vaccine doesn't have enough data. 🤷‍♀️ We have an incredible amount of data showing the vaccine is extremely effective and serious side effects so rare that even in healthy kids, the risk of side effects from the vaccine is much lower than the risk from Covid itself. And in people 40 and above, you don't even need to be able to do math to see that that is the case.


for some reason even though You r normally on my “ignore,” this appeared. 
 

I am not discouraging KT from vaccine for her son if she thinks that is right thing to do, (afaik KT is very pro vaccine and it would be useless to try to discourage her anyway🤔) but afaik he is too young . (Eta I don’t know if he is supposed to avoid vaccines due to health even if old enough.) 
 

I have let her know what *I* would do if I had a particularly vulnerable child. I am sure KT is able to make her own mind up, and to research options. 
 

ivermectin has been used for decades with a long safety profile, and in many age groups.
 

There are some people who should not get it if they have certain conditions.  
 

There have been afaik more adverse events for cv vaccines  since they have been being used than for Ivm over many years

Edited by Pen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ktgrok said:

I should add, there is a big difference between zero Covid and over 10% positivity rates. When we got down to just under 4% I was positively giddy and ready to start doing outside stuff with the kids, etc. Now the county we do most stuff in is over 12%, and we have counties in the state over 20%. 

OK but the question was what we would do, not what you should do.  Right now the positivity rate where I live is 1%.  It's less than that in New York.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Not to mention how many people, due to crappy healthcare coverage, don't KNOW if they have an underlying condition. 

I'm not sure if this was directed at me. I want to be clear that I absolutely do not think that anyone is expendable. My comment was in reference to evaluating the risks for my own family and general statistics. I'm also coming from the perspective of parenting a teen with anxiety and OCD that has grown to almost debilitating levels throughout the pandemic. So for us, the priority is getting back to as normal as possible, while making wise choices for our family. We are fully vaccinated and not masking anywhere unless it is required. We will only mask or lock down if it is mandated now, although certainly I would mask for an individual that needed me to if that situation arose. Otherwise, no.  The last thing I want is for my daughter to develop a fear of breathing in public or leaving the house at all. Because really, I believe the risk is minimal to us at this point, but the mental health implications of these choices for her are huge. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kristin0713 said:

I'm not sure if this was directed at me. I want to be clear that I absolutely do not think that anyone is expendable. My comment was in reference to evaluating the risks for my own family and general statistics. I'm also coming from the perspective of parenting a teen with anxiety and OCD that has grown to almost debilitating levels throughout the pandemic. So for us, the priority is getting back to as normal as possible, while making wise choices for our family. We are fully vaccinated and not masking anywhere unless it is required. We will only mask or lock down if it is mandated now, although certainly I would mask for an individual that needed me to if that situation arose. Otherwise, no.  The last thing I want is for my daughter to develop a fear of breathing in public or leaving the house at all. Because really, I believe the risk is minimal to us at this point, but the mental health implications of these choices for her are huge. 


yes - each situation is probably very individual

snd what works well for someone with one set of risks in one situation, and someone else with different risks in a different situation will be different. 
 

even whether a child has sibling(s) to play with or not could make a big difference 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SKL said:

OK but the question was what we would do, not what you should do.  Right now the positivity rate where I live is 1%.  It's less than that in New York.

I was giving context to why I'm concerned, and explaining I'm not looking for zero covid, but I am very concerned about double digit positivity and climbing. 

5 minutes ago, kristin0713 said:

I'm not sure if this was directed at me. I want to be clear that I absolutely do not think that anyone is expendable. My comment was in reference to evaluating the risks for my own family and general statistics. I'm also coming from the perspective of parenting a teen with anxiety and OCD that has grown to almost debilitating levels throughout the pandemic. So for us, the priority is getting back to as normal as possible, while making wise choices for our family. We are fully vaccinated and not masking anywhere unless it is required. We will only mask or lock down if it is mandated now, although certainly I would mask for an individual that needed me to if that situation arose. Otherwise, no.  The last thing I want is for my daughter to develop a fear of breathing in public or leaving the house at all. Because really, I believe the risk is minimal to us at this point, but the mental health implications of these choices for her are huge. 

It wasn't, I don't think, but thank you. Also, thank you for vaccinating. I'm not particularly frustrated with vaccinated people not masking, although with our higher rates and Delta becoming predominant - with the breakthrough infection and transmission that brings - I'm starting to be. I'm more concerned about the 50% of the population here that is not vaccinated, many of whom are also not masking or taking precautions to prevent spreading it. 

My neighbor that tested positive had already been sick for days - and working - before getting tested. He was sick and having his unvaccinated kids with full contact with him play with other kids, unmasked. etc

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pen said:


yes - each situation is probably very individual

snd what works well for someone with one set of risks in one situation, and someone else with different risks in a different situation will be different. 
 

even whether a child has sibling(s) to play with or not could make a big difference 

oh sure! And really, I'm more frustrated with policies than individuals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pen said:

ivermectin has been used for decades with a long safety profile, and in many age groups. There are some people who should not get it if they have certain conditions. 

But there is very little data it does any good, vs reams of data that the Covid vaccines are incredibly effective in preventing Covid entirely. On top of that, the safety profile in ivermectin is at much lower dosing than would be required to get plasma concentrations of ivermectin up high enough for it to be capable of killing SARS-CoV2. So, my question is why the very low amount and low quality data available for ivermectin is enough to widely recommend it, when the vastly more and higher quality data that Covid vaccines are preventing thousands of deaths every month in the US alone is not enough to recommend it. Put the other way, lack of vaccination is killing about 10,000 Americans a month, and that is rising rapidly right now.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kristin0713 said:

I'm not sure if this was directed at me. I want to be clear that I absolutely do not think that anyone is expendable. My comment was in reference to evaluating the risks for my own family and general statistics. I'm also coming from the perspective of parenting a teen with anxiety and OCD that has grown to almost debilitating levels throughout the pandemic. So for us, the priority is getting back to as normal as possible, while making wise choices for our family. We are fully vaccinated and not masking anywhere unless it is required. We will only mask or lock down if it is mandated now, although certainly I would mask for an individual that needed me to if that situation arose. Otherwise, no.  The last thing I want is for my daughter to develop a fear of breathing in public or leaving the house at all. Because really, I believe the risk is minimal to us at this point, but the mental health implications of these choices for her are huge. 

Similar here.  I am concerned about the cognitive and mental health aspects of our society reacting to small risks as if they were huge.  It reminds me of how some people constantly assume that a minor left unsupervised for two minutes will probably be kidnapped, raped, and murdered.  It's bad enough to have fears that don't match reality, but worse to change many aspects of our kids' lives based on fears that don't match reality.

It would be different if long-term masking didn't have any negative physical aspects for perfectly normal, healthy kids, but it does.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, kristin0713 said:

So for us, the priority is getting back to as normal as possible, while making wise choices for our family. We are fully vaccinated and not masking anywhere unless it is required

I think this makes total sense for a vaccinated family. If everyone who could get vaccinated did, all of this would be a no brainer, and mental health for everyone would be much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SKL said:

It would be different if long-term masking didn't have any negative physical aspects for perfectly normal, healthy kids, but it does.

? How is that? I have seen no data at all showing this, and I have read a LOT of mask data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I was giving context to why I'm concerned, and explaining I'm not looking for zero covid, but I am very concerned about double digit positivity and climbing.

But you accused people in this thread of considering your kid's life expendable, because we don't plan to lock down or mask little kids in playgrounds.  I can understand why you would be concerned, but that doesn't make us monsters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SKL said:

I am concerned about the cognitive and mental health aspects of our society reacting to small risks as if they were huge. ..

 based on fears that don't match reality.

In my town, the ICU is currently at capacity because they transported Covid patients from the city 100 miles here since the hospitals are overwhelmed there. Which means anyone with a heart attack or traumatic injury won't be able to find a hospital bed.

Not sure how being concerned about community spread under these circumstances " doesn't match reality". Sure, the covid kid may be fine. The adult they infect may end up hospitalized, and someone with an accident will die because they have to find a bed in another state. We are all connected,  and our actions have consequences far beyond the personal risk.

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 11
  • Sad 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

In my town, the ICU is currently at capacity because they transported Covid patients from the city 100 miles here since the hospitals are overwhelmed there. Which means anyone with a heart attack or traumatic injury won't be able to find a hospital bed.

Not sure how being concerned about community spread under these circumstances " doesn't match reality". Sure, the covid kid may be fine. The adult they infect may end up hospitalized, and someone with an accident will die because they have to find a bed in another state. We are all connected,  and our actions have consequences far beyond the personal risk.

So one thing to look at would be the hospital / ICU situation near where the parent asking the question lives.  It's not the same everywhere.  If I had little kids, my masking them would have zero impact on people who live where hospital capacity is stretched.  Given the current positivity rate in NY, I assume similar is true for the OP, but it would be up to her to look into that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re OP: we don't have kids at home anymore,  but with the recent spike in infections in my state, we are dialing back our activities. 

I am still comfortable with small groups of vaccinated friends indoors, and seeing one unvaxed person outdoors.

Not comfortable with large gatherings, theatre, restaurants, events. I consider stopping my chiropractor treatments since they have never taken precautions; I just started feeling OK going after being fully vaxxed since I had a year of tension and back pain to fix.

I am very uneasy about going back to unmasked undisturbed (wth autocorrect? UnDistanced) no-vax-required college teaching next month. 

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 1
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, regentrude said:

In my town, the ICU is currently at capacity because they transported Covid patients from the city 100 miles here since the hospitals are overwhelmed there. Which means anyone with a heart attack or traumatic injury won't be able to find a hospital bed.

Not sure how being concerned about community spread under these circumstances " doesn't match reality". Sure, the covid kid may be fine. The adult they infect may end up hospitalized, and someone with an accident will die because they have to find a bed in another state. We are all connected,  and our actions have consequences far beyond the personal risk.


dors anyone know source for current icu capacities? 
 

I can only find limited info for a very few places currently 

 

such as:

 

https://coronavirus.dc.gov/page/hospital-status-data


 

July 9, 2021

  • Total ICU Beds in Hospitals: 345
  • ICU Beds Available: 57
  • Total Reported Ventilators in Hospitals: 440
  • In-Use Ventilators in Hospitals: 144
  • Available Ventilators in Hospitals: 296
  • Total COVID-19 Patients in DC Hospitals: 20
  • Total COVID-19 Patients in ICU: 2
  • Total Patients in DC Hospitals (COVID and non-COVID): 2,188
  • Percentage of pre-COVID Hospital Bed Capacity: 88%

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

I have to say, its really frustrating to read and hear how it isn't dangerous for healthy kids with no underlying conditions when you HAVE a kid with an underlying condition. Those kids are treated as if they are expendable, or don't exist. 

Newsmax host Rob Schmitt says the quiet part out loud:

"I feel like a vaccination in a weird way is just generally kind of going against nature. Like, I mean, if there is some disease out there  maybe there's just an ebb and flow to life where something's supposed to wipe out a certain amount of people, and that's just kind of the way evolution goes. Vaccines kind of stand in the way of that. Do you follow what I'm saying?"

  • Confused 4
  • Sad 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KSera said:

I've still not heard any answers to why people who encourage everyone to take Ivermectin despite very little data that it is effective are at the same time usually the same people who go to great lengths to try to discourage people from getting vaccinated because they think the vaccine doesn't have enough data. 🤷‍♀️ We have an incredible amount of data showing the vaccine is extremely effective and serious side effects so rare that even in healthy kids, the risk of side effects from the vaccine is much lower than the risk from Covid itself. And in people 40 and above, you don't even need to be able to do math to see that that is the case.

Good question! 
 

Edited to delete the rest because it was too negative for this thread.

Edited by TCB
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TCB said:

Ok stopping there because I am incredibly grumpy about the whole thing right now, but the lack of logic is frustrating. I blame it on the WTM lol, encouraging us on the importance of learning logic. So disappointing when there is a huge lack of logic!

I get this so much! I’m hyper-logical in my thinking style, and lack of logic makes me unreasonably grumpy as well (I do think there’s good reason to be grumpy when the willful lack of logic is leading to so much loss of life, though).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I should add, there is a big difference between zero Covid and over 10% positivity rates. When we got down to just under 4% I was positively giddy and ready to start doing outside stuff with the kids, etc. Now the county we do most stuff in is over 12%, and we have counties in the state over 20%. 

These numbers seem so crazy to me.  Even in NSW who are in a kind of lockdown positivity rate is 0.25%

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

Since I just heard yesterday from friends that their very healthy absolutely no underlying conditions 24 year old son and 25 year old daughter now have long Covid (with heart issues and other problems that are not minor), this "it isn't dangerous for healthy kids" mantra is a big gamble. 

Yeah, I don't feel like we know that. And I'm really sorry about your friends' kids. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I should add, there is a big difference between zero Covid and over 10% positivity rates. When we got down to just under 4% I was positively giddy and ready to start doing outside stuff with the kids, etc. Now the county we do most stuff in is over 12%, and we have counties in the state over 20%. 

And that's honestly the question I was mostly asking. WHEN would you start dialing back activities? WHEN would you put the masks back on in playgrounds? WHEN would you start seriously thinking about staying home for a few weeks/months except for outdoor masked playdates outside playgrounds? 

Right now, our positivity just jumped up from 0.3% to more than 1.1% percent. And I'm MUCH less happy with the slope of this jump than I am with the absolute numbers. 

Honestly, I was fine with a positivity of 1% and dropping. I feel freaked out about a positivity of 1.1% and rapidly rising 😕 . It's still small, but it's making me ask hard questions. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

And that's honestly the question I was mostly asking. WHEN would you start dialing back activities? WHEN would you put the masks back on in playgrounds? WHEN would you start seriously thinking about staying home for a few weeks/months except for outdoor masked playdates outside playgrounds? 

Right now, our positivity just jumped up from 0.3% to more than 1.1% percent. And I'm MUCH less happy with the slope of this jump than I am with the absolute numbers. 

Honestly, I was fine with a positivity of 1% and dropping. I feel freaked out about a positivity of 1.1% and rapidly rising 😕 . It's still small, but it's making me ask hard questions. 

Well, since we've never gotten that low, I never stopped doing those things. I was starting to think of it, when we got down under 4%. But then we went back up...

At 1.1% I'd probably be still doing things..

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ktgrok said:

Well, since we've never gotten that low, I never stopped doing those things. I was starting to think of it, when we got down under 4%. But then we went back up...

At 1.1% I'd probably be still doing things..

Yep, I'm still doing things. But I'm thinking about what happens if it keeps going up 😕 . I'm a planner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

And that's honestly the question I was mostly asking. WHEN would you start dialing back activities? WHEN would you put the masks back on in playgrounds? WHEN would you start seriously thinking about staying home for a few weeks/months except for outdoor masked playdates outside playgrounds? 

Right now, our positivity just jumped up from 0.3% to more than 1.1% percent. And I'm MUCH less happy with the slope of this jump than I am with the absolute numbers. 

Honestly, I was fine with a positivity of 1% and dropping. I feel freaked out about a positivity of 1.1% and rapidly rising 😕 . It's still small, but it's making me ask hard questions. 

 

I think it's very reasonable for you to be concerned.  I don't like Delta. 

We're at a positivity rate of 0.9% here and holding steady.  68%/78% of the total population/eligible population have had at least one dose, 47%/53% have had both doses.  Both of my kids have had their first dose, and the older one has had both doses.  

We're still only doing outdoor activities, and avoiding crowds.  No indoor kid stuff.   I won't be comfortable with indoor kid activities until we see how delta pans out, and until most kids under 12 are vaxxed, I don't think.  We have stopped masking outdoors - but we are meeting in very small groups of like-minded, risk-averse people.  I think we'd still be masking if we went to crowded playgrounds.  (This pandemic isn't over until the whole world is vaxxed.  Until then, it's global whack-a-mole)

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, wathe said:

I think it's very reasonable for you to be concerned.  I don't like Delta. 

We're at a positivity rate of 0.9% here and holding steady.  68%/78% of the total population/eligible population have had at least one dose, 47%/53% have had both doses.  Both of my kids have had their first dose, and the older one has had both doses.  

We're still only doing outdoor activities, and avoiding crowds.  No indoor kid stuff.   I won't be comfortable with indoor kid activities until we see how delta pans out, and until most kids under 12 are vaxxed, I don't think.  We have stopped masking outdoors - but we are meeting in very small groups of like-minded, risk-averse people.  I think we'd still be masking if we went to crowded playgrounds.  (This pandemic isn't over until the whole world is vaxxed.  Until then, it's global whack-a-mole)

Yeah, I might ask them to mask in playgrounds again. 

The kids are in (outdoor) camp this week and they are masking all day. They are managing. They can manage playgrounds as well. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...