tysker said:
Again we are making all these arrangements and concessions for one person out of 400-500? This seems like a lot of deliberation, work, agita and hair-pulling for a fraction of a percent of a population that is scared or is vulnerable.
You still refuse to address that the leaders at every level still want to contain the virus. It isn't an issue regarding the virus' IFR. Even though a small number of those infected die, and children are less likely to have severe complications, the mitigation strategies are intended to lower the R0 from a 2.3 to below 1. You can argue that protecting a small number of people on a campus is not a justifiable reason to take extreme precautions. But, unless you convince our leaders that containment of the virus is not necessary, this is the reality.
Schools are notorious sites of infection spread, and faculty, staff, and students are not confined to the campus. The risk of community spread once schools reopen is a legitimate concern even though European schools have not seen a noticeable uptick since reopening . Many of these European countries also have control of the spread and can contain small outbreaks. In the U.S., we are still experiencing a substantial increase in cases.
Yes, in Texas, most districts are offering a choice between 100% on-line instruction and 100% face-to-face instruction. Parents of high risk students can choose to keep their children home. I predict that high risk teachers will be the distance learning teachers and may have the option to teach remotely. This will ensure the safety of many students and faculty. However, even in light of giving parents choice, efforts are going to be in place to minimize the spread on campuses. Nevertheless, regardless of any mitigation measures, people on campus are going to be infected and school closures are inevitable.
