Coronavirus

[rb]

So Trump Tweets to open the schools ASAP, but how are the schools going to open in states that have high infection rates. Unless those rates go down, AZ, AR, FLA, GA, TX and many others won’t be open the schools at all, imo. In any case, the decision to open is made at a district level, not by the  governor, much less federal level. The governor/ states gives general guidelines but that’s pretty much it.

 

Having lived through the online schooling since March with my teenager I pretty much think it’s a disaster. If these states can’t open schools in many areas, many parents are forced to stay at home which pretty much guarantees that the local economy there is going to be crappy.

 

I located in MA and our schools district has to create 3 plans ( online only, hybrid online/regular and regular schools with some precautions). I am hoping for the latter and I would be seriously pissed if my local government messed this up and gets hospitals and schools shut down in exchange for keeping bars, gyms and nightclubs open.

 

Not to mention even if schools manage to get solid systems and software in place for online learning there is still the issue of teachers themselves. Online teaching is a whole different ballgame. Throw in teachers over the age of 50 who have been in the classroom for 30 years and their effectiveness dwindles. Here in PA a ton of my coworkers pulled their kids from school and rushed them to PA cyber school simply because the teachers are at least trained for online learning.

You're missing the point. The school system besides other important things is a giant day care program to look after kids while parents go to work so they don't become delinquents. It doesn't work online. It needs to be physical.

[Castanza]

So Trump Tweets to open the schools ASAP, but how are the schools going to open in states that have high infection rates. Unless those rates go down, AZ, AR, FLA, GA, TX and many others won’t be open the schools at all, imo. In any case, the decision to open is made at a district level, not by the  governor, much less federal level. The governor/ states gives general guidelines but that’s pretty much it.

 

Having lived through the online schooling since March with my teenager I pretty much think it’s a disaster. If these states can’t open schools in many areas, many parents are forced to stay at home which pretty much guarantees that the local economy there is going to be crappy.

 

I located in MA and our schools district has to create 3 plans ( online only, hybrid online/regular and regular schools with some precautions). I am hoping for the latter and I would be seriously pissed if my local government messed this up and gets hospitals and schools shut down in exchange for keeping bars, gyms and nightclubs open.

 

Not to mention even if schools manage to get solid systems and software in place for online learning there is still the issue of teachers themselves. Online teaching is a whole different ballgame. Throw in teachers over the age of 50 who have been in the classroom for 30 years and their effectiveness dwindles. Here in PA a ton of my coworkers pulled their kids from school and rushed them to PA cyber school simply because the teachers are at least trained for online learning.

You're missing the point. The school system besides other important things is a giant day care program to look after kids while parents go to work so they don't become delinquents. It doesn't work online. It needs to be physical.

 

What? I agree with you. I was just saying a lot of parents I know are anticipating the lock downs again and are trying to make lemonade out of lemons.

[Spekulatius]

So Trump Tweets to open the schools ASAP, but how are the schools going to open in states that have high infection rates. Unless those rates go down, AZ, AR, FLA, GA, TX and many others won’t be open the schools at all, imo. In any case, the decision to open is made at a district level, not by the  governor, much less federal level. The governor/ states gives general guidelines but that’s pretty much it.

 

Having lived through the online schooling since March with my teenager I pretty much think it’s a disaster. If these states can’t open schools in many areas, many parents are forced to stay at home which pretty much guarantees that the local economy there is going to be crappy.

 

I located in MA and our schools district has to create 3 plans ( online only, hybrid online/regular and regular schools with some precautions). I am hoping for the latter and I would be seriously pissed if my local government messed this up and gets hospitals and schools shut down in exchange for keeping bars, gyms and nightclubs open.

 

Not to mention even if schools manage to get solid systems and software in place for online learning there is still the issue of teachers themselves. Online teaching is a whole different ballgame. Throw in teachers over the age of 50 who have been in the classroom for 30 years and their effectiveness dwindles. Here in PA a ton of my coworkers pulled their kids from school and rushed them to PA cyber school simply because the teachers are at least trained for online learning.

Our own school district is pretty good and I like most teachers, but it didn’t have the resources when the lightning struck on March and everything went remote. It took them 2 weeks to come up with an improved plan and we as parents had a hard time to make sense of what they came up with. I regard it pretty much as lost time and student engagement tanked for sure, not just with our own kids, but other parents reported the same.

 

This remote learning may work for adults, but I think it’s worthless for smaller kids and mostly worthless for high schoolers too. Both my wife and myself are working away from home and in the evening we had a hard time to trace back what was happening during the day , what should have happened and what actually did happen.

 

I have never seen such a mess. I think the fall Semester if it continues remotely would be a bit better,  but not much. I hope that for the sake of mankind, the kids get back in the classrooms, not just for the sake of learning, but also for the social interactions. I can give up school bands, sport and all that extra stuff, but we need to get the basics done in the class room.

[Cigarbutt]

...

If you were under age 40 and in good health, would you pursue a covid vaccination?  I wouldn't.  The mortality rate and morbidity does not justify the time and the risk of side-effects for people of that age.  If you are over 50 or 55, it starts to become a real risk and the vaccine might offer some real value. 

I hope we will see a vaccine developed, but I am not particularly optimistic about the adoption rate or the efficacy of the vaccine.

SJ

You have posted positive views on herd immunity in this thread. With this in mind, it's a real head-scratcher (looking for a rational explanation) as to why somebody (from an individual or collective point of view) would, if given a choice, pick the natural way over the vaccine. ?

It's already hard to craft a message for the growing crowd with convictions. How to win when even rational people start to wonder?

 

[Spekulatius]

Does anyone believe a vaccine will be developed in any reasonable time frame? Sure, necessity is a great driver of innovation. But as far as I'm aware, not a single RNA vaccine has ever been approved for human use (correct me if I'm wrong on that). That includes former attempts at a vaccine for SARS. I guess there could be some extenuating factors that contribute to the lack of RNA vaccines other than current scientific understanding. Lack of funding, potential profit, and general interest from big pharma/govt entities could be factors as well.

Depends on what's a "reasonable time frame".

 

The time frame I see most often in the media is 12-18 months. It's hard not to be doubtful of that claim.

From what I at this point we have the knowledge and capability to pretty much make any (most?) vaccine in 12-18 months. So I'm not so worried about the time frame.

 

What I'm worried when it comes to the vaccine is:

 

1. Will it be any good?

 

2. Will the moron internet people actually get vaccinated?

 

 

If you were under age 40 and in good health, would you pursue a covid vaccination?  I wouldn't.  The mortality rate and morbidity does not justify the time and the risk of side-effects for people of that age.  If you are over 50 or 55, it starts to become a real risk and the vaccine might offer some real value. 

 

I hope we will see a vaccine developed, but I am not particularly optimistic about the adoption rate or the efficacy of the vaccine.

 

 

SJ

 

Having a vaccine with a known and well established immune response will beat getting the virus in the wild any time. I don’t know how this is even in question. In any case, count me in as getting vaccinated even if it is only 50% effective. I also get vaccinated for flue every year which wouldn’t kill me either, but having the flu isn’t fun and having COVID much less so. My wife has seen patients aged 30 year up in ICU‘s in rather sorry conditions. Right now,  an acquaintance of her from CA in her forties is in the hospital and hasn’t exactly the greatest time there. If I can help it, I‘d rather avoid such a  ordeal.

[StubbleJumper]

...

If you were under age 40 and in good health, would you pursue a covid vaccination?  I wouldn't.  The mortality rate and morbidity does not justify the time and the risk of side-effects for people of that age.  If you are over 50 or 55, it starts to become a real risk and the vaccine might offer some real value. 

I hope we will see a vaccine developed, but I am not particularly optimistic about the adoption rate or the efficacy of the vaccine.

SJ

You have posted positive views on herd immunity in this thread. With this in mind, it's a real head-scratcher (looking for a rational explanation) as to why somebody (from an individual or collective point of view) would, if given a choice, pick the natural way over the vaccine. ?

It's already hard to craft a message for the growing crowd with convictions. How to win when even rational people start to wonder?

 

 

Well, first RB says that I made a dumb statement, and now you are questioning whether I am rational!  Not sure what numbers you guys have been looking at, but if I were under age 40 I'd be looking at it the same way that I looked at the flu vaccine (oops, I used the flu word, which sometimes triggers people).  What is your benefit from the vaccine (ie, what risk are you managing with it) and what is your risk from the vaccine itself.  Now, RB has posited that I made a dumb statement because most vaccines have no side effects, but the fact of the matter is that even with the flu vaccine there is a very small number of bad outcomes...and with a rushed vaccine, the risk might be heightened. That risk would be fine if there were an obvious benefit, but to some age groups, there is not necessarily an obvious benefit.

 

So, what do you say to "rational," numerate person under age 40?  The IFR for the under 40 group is, what, less than 0.1%, and most of those are likely people with existing co-morbidities?  The hospitalization rate for the under 40 group is, what, 2 or 3 per 100,000?  I would say that a rational, numerate person who is under 40 and healthy would not be wrong to take a pass on any vaccine that offers less than full immunity and that has been rushed to market.  You can appeal to people's sense of solidarity and goodwill to their fellow man all you want, but in the end, people will make a decision based on their own individual risk and benefit.

 

 

SJ

[StubbleJumper]

Does anyone believe a vaccine will be developed in any reasonable time frame? Sure, necessity is a great driver of innovation. But as far as I'm aware, not a single RNA vaccine has ever been approved for human use (correct me if I'm wrong on that). That includes former attempts at a vaccine for SARS. I guess there could be some extenuating factors that contribute to the lack of RNA vaccines other than current scientific understanding. Lack of funding, potential profit, and general interest from big pharma/govt entities could be factors as well.

Depends on what's a "reasonable time frame".

 

The time frame I see most often in the media is 12-18 months. It's hard not to be doubtful of that claim.

From what I at this point we have the knowledge and capability to pretty much make any (most?) vaccine in 12-18 months. So I'm not so worried about the time frame.

 

What I'm worried when it comes to the vaccine is:

 

1. Will it be any good?

 

2. Will the moron internet people actually get vaccinated?

 

 

If you were under age 40 and in good health, would you pursue a covid vaccination?  I wouldn't.  The mortality rate and morbidity does not justify the time and the risk of side-effects for people of that age.  If you are over 50 or 55, it starts to become a real risk and the vaccine might offer some real value. 

 

I hope we will see a vaccine developed, but I am not particularly optimistic about the adoption rate or the efficacy of the vaccine.

 

 

SJ

 

Having a vaccine with a known and well established immune response will beat getting the virus in the wild any time. I don’t know how this is even in question. In any case, count me in as getting vaccinated even if it is only 50% effective. I also get vaccinated for flue every year which wouldn’t kill me either, but having the flu isn’t fun and having COVID much less so. My wife has seen patients aged 30 year up in ICU‘s in rather sorry conditions. Right now,  an acquaintance of her from CA in her forties is in the hospital and hasn’t exactly the greatest time there. If I can help it, I‘d rather avoid such a  ordeal.

 

 

I will probably get the vaccine too, if it appears that it reduces my risk by even half.  I am not in the highest risk age group, but this virus is one where you'd far rather be 30 than 50.

 

 

SJ

[StubbleJumper]

Does anyone believe a vaccine will be developed in any reasonable time frame? Sure, necessity is a great driver of innovation. But as far as I'm aware, not a single RNA vaccine has ever been approved for human use (correct me if I'm wrong on that). That includes former attempts at a vaccine for SARS. I guess there could be some extenuating factors that contribute to the lack of RNA vaccines other than current scientific understanding. Lack of funding, potential profit, and general interest from big pharma/govt entities could be factors as well.

Depends on what's a "reasonable time frame".

 

The time frame I see most often in the media is 12-18 months. It's hard not to be doubtful of that claim.

From what I at this point we have the knowledge and capability to pretty much make any (most?) vaccine in 12-18 months. So I'm not so worried about the time frame.

 

What I'm worried when it comes to the vaccine is:

 

1. Will it be any good?

 

2. Will the moron internet people actually get vaccinated?

 

 

If you were under age 40 and in good health, would you pursue a covid vaccination?  I wouldn't.  The mortality rate and morbidity does not justify the time and the risk of side-effects for people of that age.  If you are over 50 or 55, it starts to become a real risk and the vaccine might offer some real value. 

 

I hope we will see a vaccine developed, but I am not particularly optimistic about the adoption rate or the efficacy of the vaccine.

 

 

SJ

 

Do you think it is possible that you're thinking would be swayed if the government was able to put forth an effective message that, as with masks, getting vaccinated is an act that is beneficial to the health and safety of the more vulnerable members of your community and Country?

 

 

An appeal to altruism?  It might work for some people, but based on the behaviour of young people over the past 4 months, I wouldn't count on that messaging being a complete success.

 

 

SJ

[meiroy]

 

Several members of my extended family are anti-vaxxers.  Once there's a legit vaccine out, we'll get it, and then I'm not sure we'll want any contact with these people. Sadly.

 

If people are not willing to wear masks, will they get vaccinated? If plenty won't, it can't be contained. I'm not too optimistic.

 

 

[Investor20]

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa939/5867798

 

It is Time to Address Airborne Transmission of COVID-19

Some excerpts below.  Full article accessible at above link

 

Together with the authors, 239 scientists support this Commentary

 

Most public health organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO), do not recognize airborne transmission except for aerosol-generating procedures performed in healthcare settings.

 

Hand washing and social distancing are appropriate, but in our view, insufficient to provide protection from virus-carrying respiratory microdroplets released into the air by infected people.

 

This problem is especially acute in indoor or enclosed environments, particularly those that are crowded and have inadequate ventilation relative to the number of occupants and extended exposure periods (as graphically depicted in Figure 1). For example, airborne transmission appears to be the only plausible explanation for several superspreading events investigated which occurred under such conditions e.g. [10], and others where recommended precautions related to direct droplet transmissions were followed.

 

 

The measures that should be taken to mitigate airborne transmission risk include:

Provide sufficient and effective ventilation (supply clean outdoor air, minimize recirculating air) particularly in public buildings, workplace environments, schools, hospitals, and aged care homes.

 

Supplement general ventilation with airborne infection controls such as local exhaust, high efficiency air filtration, and germicidal ultraviolet lights.

 

Avoid overcrowding, particularly in public transport and public buildings.

.....................

 

I saw some newsmedia saying this supports using masks, though from a search of the article, I did not find mask being mentioned even once.

[meiroy]

 

It's unbelievable these discussions on basic measures are still going on.

 

When there's a fog of war, the person in charge has to make quick decisions based on partial information and uncertainty, they don't wait until everything is known and clear or just pretend there's no war, because they will lose.

 

From day 1, people should have worn surgical masks, avoid unnecessary gathering, ventilate,  test as much as possible etc. A complete no brainer based on what we know about viruses. This is exactly what they did in South Korea/Taiwan and some other countries.  Once these basic measures are taken, something can be taken out or added when it's clearer what's going on.

 

But here we are, it's almost the middle of July and we're still debating if to take these measures. FFS.

 

 

 

[Gregmal]

I think everyone should find it obvious a virus can be airborne. Ever smoked a cigarette or been to a hooka bar? Picture one pull. Thats a normal inhale. Now picture what it looks like, especially indoors, when you exhale. That shit sticks around for a LOOOOONG time. Use common sense people.

[ERICOPOLY]

So Trump Tweets to open the schools ASAP, but how are the schools going to open in states that have high infection rates. Unless those rates go down, AZ, AR, FLA, GA, TX and many others won’t be open the schools at all, imo. In any case, the decision to open is made at a district level, not by the  governor, much less federal level. The governor/ states gives general guidelines but that’s pretty much it.

 

Having lived through the online schooling since March with my teenager I pretty much think it’s a disaster. If these states can’t open schools in many areas, many parents are forced to stay at home which pretty much guarantees that the local economy there is going to be crappy.

 

I located in MA and our schools district has to create 3 plans ( online only, hybrid online/regular and regular schools with some precautions). I am hoping for the latter and I would be seriously pissed if my local government messed this up and gets hospitals and schools shut down in exchange for keeping bars, gyms and nightclubs open.

 

Not to mention even if schools manage to get solid systems and software in place for online learning there is still the issue of teachers themselves. Online teaching is a whole different ballgame. Throw in teachers over the age of 50 who have been in the classroom for 30 years and their effectiveness dwindles. Here in PA a ton of my coworkers pulled their kids from school and rushed them to PA cyber school simply because the teachers are at least trained for online learning.

You're missing the point. The school system besides other important things is a giant day care program to look after kids while parents go to work so they don't become delinquents. It doesn't work online. It needs to be physical.

 

The timeline is also political to reopen schools and get those jobs counted again before the election.  Many of the 'unemployed' are actually employed, but staying home with kids.

[Castanza]

As far as a vaccine goes and whether or not people will get it. I think the Supreme Court case Jacobson vs Massachusetts will come into play at some point

 

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/

[Read the Footnotes]

So Trump Tweets to open the schools ASAP, but how are the schools going to open in states that have high infection rates. Unless those rates go down, AZ, AR, FLA, GA, TX and many others won’t be open the schools at all, imo. In any case, the decision to open is made at a district level, not by the  governor, much less federal level. The governor/ states gives general guidelines but that’s pretty much it.

 

Having lived through the online schooling since March with my teenager I pretty much think it’s a disaster. If these states can’t open schools in many areas, many parents are forced to stay at home which pretty much guarantees that the local economy there is going to be crappy.

 

I located in MA and our schools district has to create 3 plans ( online only, hybrid online/regular and regular schools with some precautions). I am hoping for the latter and I would be seriously pissed if my local government messed this up and gets hospitals and schools shut down in exchange for keeping bars, gyms and nightclubs open.

 

Not to mention even if schools manage to get solid systems and software in place for online learning there is still the issue of teachers themselves. Online teaching is a whole different ballgame. Throw in teachers over the age of 50 who have been in the classroom for 30 years and their effectiveness dwindles. Here in PA a ton of my coworkers pulled their kids from school and rushed them to PA cyber school simply because the teachers are at least trained for online learning.

You're missing the point. The school system besides other important things is a giant day care program to look after kids while parents go to work so they don't become delinquents. It doesn't work online. It needs to be physical.

 

The timeline is also political to reopen schools and get those jobs counted again before the election.  Many of the 'unemployed' are actually employed, but staying home with kids.

The opposite is true too. Many are unemployed, but may still be receiving benefits and compensation and therefore cannot file for unemployment yet, and may not be counted in unemployment figures.

[Investor20]

 

It's unbelievable these discussions on basic measures are still going on.

 

When there's a fog of war, the person in charge has to make quick decisions based on partial information and uncertainty, they don't wait until everything is known and clear or just pretend there's no war, because they will lose.

 

From day 1, people should have worn surgical masks, avoid unnecessary gathering, ventilate,  test as much as possible etc. A complete no brainer based on what we know about viruses. This is exactly what they did in South Korea/Taiwan and some other countries.  Once these basic measures are taken, something can be taken out or added when it's clearer what's going on.

 

But here we are, it's almost the middle of July and we're still debating if to take these measures. FFS.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/506239-who-reviewing-possibility-of-airborne-transmission-of

WHO said it will release a brief on the issue in the coming days.

 

Why do they think outside is better than inside? WHO is reminding me of sloth in movie Zootopia.

 

[Investor20]

https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/doi/10.1093/aje/kwaa093/5847586

Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis

 

https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/25085/

Using Hydroxychloroquine and Other Drugs to Fight Pandemic

An interview based on above article.

 

The above article has more studies that I missed.  Dr. Risch concluded

 

"Early outpatient illness is very different than later hospitalized florid disease and the treatments differ. Evidence about use of hydroxychloroquine alone, or of hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin in inpatients, is irrelevant concerning efficacy of the pair in early high-risk outpatient disease. Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy."

[ERICOPOLY]

So Trump Tweets to open the schools ASAP, but how are the schools going to open in states that have high infection rates. Unless those rates go down, AZ, AR, FLA, GA, TX and many others won’t be open the schools at all, imo. In any case, the decision to open is made at a district level, not by the  governor, much less federal level. The governor/ states gives general guidelines but that’s pretty much it.

 

Having lived through the online schooling since March with my teenager I pretty much think it’s a disaster. If these states can’t open schools in many areas, many parents are forced to stay at home which pretty much guarantees that the local economy there is going to be crappy.

 

I located in MA and our schools district has to create 3 plans ( online only, hybrid online/regular and regular schools with some precautions). I am hoping for the latter and I would be seriously pissed if my local government messed this up and gets hospitals and schools shut down in exchange for keeping bars, gyms and nightclubs open.

 

Not to mention even if schools manage to get solid systems and software in place for online learning there is still the issue of teachers themselves. Online teaching is a whole different ballgame. Throw in teachers over the age of 50 who have been in the classroom for 30 years and their effectiveness dwindles. Here in PA a ton of my coworkers pulled their kids from school and rushed them to PA cyber school simply because the teachers are at least trained for online learning.

You're missing the point. The school system besides other important things is a giant day care program to look after kids while parents go to work so they don't become delinquents. It doesn't work online. It needs to be physical.

 

The timeline is also political to reopen schools and get those jobs counted again before the election.  Many of the 'unemployed' are actually employed, but staying home with kids.

The opposite is true too. Many are unemployed, but may still be receiving benefits and compensation and therefore cannot file for unemployment yet, and may not be counted in unemployment figures.

 

At my wife's employer, they are still receiving health insurance and accruing negative PTO (which is cash paid to them by the employer).  And they are ALSO collecting unemployment.

 

Isn't that receiving benefits and compensation?  Seems counter to what you are saying, can you explain what you mean?

[Liberty]

The timeline is also political to reopen schools and get those jobs counted again before the election.  Many of the 'unemployed' are actually employed, but staying home with kids.

 

 

"They told him he polled best on the economy. They told him the economy can't reopen unless kids are back in school. You can be pretty sure that was the extent of his thinking on all this."

[Gregmal]

Has anyone seen or looked into anything on what the potential effects are of school aged kids potentially missing a year plus of class? Lets get real, online learning, at least for certain age groups, isn't feasible.

[Castanza]

Has anyone seen or looked into anything on what the potential effects are of school aged kids potentially missing a year plus of class? Lets get real, online learning, at least for certain age groups, isn't feasible.

 

I was thinking about this today. Tried to think of a positive situation.

 

- High School graduates this year and the next few years may entertain the idea of not pursuing college right away or at all.

    - Could help sure up the lag in filling blue collar jobs.

    - Potentially change the financial mindset of an entire generation.

    - The plethora of BA. BS holders looking for employment may benefit if there is some lag in upcoming college graduates. Basically give them some more time to filter through

      the system (if the economy up ticks) 

[rb]

I don't think it's that big of a deal. When I graduated high school it was during a time when high school went from 5 to 4 years for university going people. They were ok to shrink 5 years in 4 with no problem. Then in university in year 1 they pretty much cover again what you did in the last year of high school. Then if you go the blue collar way it's not a tragedy that you're not so good at trig, calculus or King Lear.

 

So from a quality of learning I dont think it maters at all.

[Liberty]

Has anyone seen or looked into anything on what the potential effects are of school aged kids potentially missing a year plus of class? Lets get real, online learning, at least for certain age groups, isn't feasible.

 

I'm sure it sucks, at least in some aspects. What's the impact of losing grandparents and uncles and aunts and possibly parents, or having parents/family with physical problems that last after the disease, though?

 

It's not like there's a choice between a perfect world and a choice between this. The choice was to competently deal with the outbreak, like most other countries, and have very little cases going in the fall. It's not when the house is on fire that you wonder if you should maybe get some insurance and buy a fire extinguisher.

[Liberty]

I don't think it's that big of a deal. When I graduated high school it was during a time when high school went from 5 to 4 years for university going people. They were ok to shrink 5 years in 4 with no problem. Then in university in year 1 they pretty much cover again what you did in the last year of high school. Then if you go the blue collar way it's not a tragedy that you're not so good at trig, calculus or King Lear.

 

So from a quality of learning I dont think it maters at all.

 

School's primary function is pretty much to babysit kids while parents work. There's actually a very low density of learning going on there. The social aspects are important, but can also be two-sided since many schools have pretty bad peer culture and are run more like prisons than anything else (if your school wasn't like that, good for you, but I'm sure most people here don't come from bad neighbourhoods..).

 

I'm sure it'll be bad for some, neutral for others, and maybe good for some...

[Investor20]

Interview with Dr. John Ioannidis. Excerpts below

https://usa.greekreporter.com/2020/06/27/up-to-300-million-people-may-be-infected-by-covid-19-stanford-guru-john-ioannidis-says/

 

Fatality rate by age:

 

For people younger than 45, the infection fatality rate is almost 0%.

For 45 to 70, it is probably about 0.05-0.3%.

For those above 70, it escalates substantially, to 1% or higher for those over 85.

For frail, debilitated elderly people with multiple health problems who are infected in nursing homes, it can go up to 25% during major out breaks in these facilities.

 

On risks of lockdown:

 

Globally, the lockdown measures have increased the number of people at risk of starvation to 1.1 billion, and they are putting at risk millions of lives, with the potential resurgence of tuberculosis, childhood diseases like measles where vaccination programs are disrupted, and malaria. I hope that policymakers look at the big picture of all the potential problems and not only on the very important, but relatively thin slice of evidence that is COVID-19.

...........................

 

Schools do lot more than education.  Many schools insist on vaccination which prompts parents to get children vaccinated.

They provide meals.  Speech therapy and other early interventions. Provide facilities for sports.

When 0-45 years fatalities rate is "almost zero", why dont we focus on real vulnerable?

We had 40%+ deaths from Nursing homes which are most vulnerable and closed schools including elementary schools.