I work in a small school. We have had about 5 staff members and a few kids (that we know of) test positive. It seems that they are getting this virus at home (family gatherings etc) but once they enter the building the virus does not seem to spread. The measures that are put in place seem to stop the spread- masks, social distancing, hand washing, no sharing supplies etc.
I think it is smart to get tested, but my experience is that you are likely fine (based on what I see in my school).
Obviously one problem is that unless the schools mandate the vaccines there are going to be many people who DONāT get it. There would be pushback to mandates, so itās questionable how far they can go.
Thank you @twogirls! That was my gut feeling, but itās reassuring to hear from others. I also need to remember that if masks didnāt work weād be in much worse shape from just going to grocery where most are masked. Itās still astonishing to me that positive rates are as high as they are even though we have a city mask mandate. Maybe a lot more people are having gatherings than I thought. Our social and work group just donāt leave their homes or socialize so itās probably an atypical sample.
Our kidsā schools (private) required immunizations and records. Come to think of it, so did college kidās school. Iām assuming privates will be able to mandate that but unless a state does, publics will have many who choose not to get the vaccine.
Masks will extend the time needed to become infected if one is in the presence of a contagious person. However, if one is in the presence of a contagious person in an indoor enclosed space that is poorly ventilated, then being there for hours is likely to give enough exposure to droplets that escape the masks to get an infectious dose of virus. In the K-8 classroom, the teacher is the most likely potential spreader, since the teacher does the largest portion of the talking (which produces more virus droplets than just breathing), and adults presumably can exhale droplet further than kids.
Regarding your work going back to the workplace in three weeks, why wouldnāt just wait until general vaccine availability?
If masks reduce virus droplets you exhale by 2/3 and protect you against 1/3 of virus droplets around you that you may inhale, then if everyone is wearing masks, it will take 4.5 times as long to become infected compared to no masks in the same situation.
So if it takes 10 minutes in an enclosed poorly ventilated space to become infected by a nearby contagious person without masks, it would take 45 minutes with masks. But if you are sharing that space with the contagious person for 4 hours, you would still likely be infected even with masks.
Okay, well, thatās bad news. Not sure what we can really do at this point. School day is 7 hours so kids and teacher in the same room that entire time. Large room (1000 sqft) with maybe 10 kids.
As to your question about work: we do not really have a choice.
Stanford made a change yesterday and is no longer allowing frosh and sophomores back to campus for winter quarter as was originally planned.
My sister teaches 4th grade and they are going back tomorrow (tried it in Oct, lasted 2 weeks with a snow day in there!). They arenāt there 7 hours any more. used to be 8:30-3, but now is 9-1:30. The teachers then have some online hours to help. Things like art, music and PE are online or take home work.
Only k-5 is back in school. Middle and HS will try to return in Feb.
My sister, although sheās 65, has not been vaccinated yet. A suburban district has started the vaccinations for nurses, staff, and (soon) teachers.
I agree with that timing. I am in no way expecting vaccinations for either of my college students this semester. My parent in assisted living got a first dose of Pfizer 12/28. MA is just now dosing EMT and essential first responders. It is folly to think that college students will receive both or any doses of the vaccine any time soon in New England. (Unless those students have existing co morbid conditions elevating their place in line).
I agree we generally see things through our own confirmation bias of what our own cohorts are doing. But in MA the highest rate of spread is among 0-19 yr olds. And it has been for some weeks now. Followed by 20-29 yr olds.
āBut in MA the highest rate of spread is among 0-19 yr olds. And it has been for some weeks now. Followed by 20-29 yr olds.ā
This is interestingā¦My sonās school decided to welcome all students back for spring semester (they closed fall semester), providing single rooms for all freshmen and some sophomore (and all other including grad students live off campus) from January 21st. Two arrival tests and twice-a-week on-campus testing is mandatory throughout spring semester. In-person classes will start on February 1st. Past weeks in his college town, positive rates wee 5-7%, age groups 20-29 & 30-39 & 40-49 are consistently very high followed by age groups 50+, then 10-19, 0-9 (lowest)ā¦Once colleges bring back students, I can imagine a age group 10-19 & 20-29 will go up much higherā¦
What state Jejeje? MA doesnāt break age group prevalence down by town, just prevalence by county and city. But if I were to hazard a guess, its not the pediatrics that are driving the high positives but older teens 18-19 yr olds. And the fact that 20-29 is next highest age bracket just shows me that masking compliance and life style social distancing among those ages just isnāt high.
University of California system just announced it will in-person for fall.
Baltimore, MD.
I was told by a state health official back in November here in Colorado that the 18 and 19 year olds had the highest infection rate per 1000 people.
They also saw a jump at 16 year olds and assumed that was connected to being able to drive.
Williams Record article noting nine staff/faculty staff test positive since December, still very low numbers and notes that robust testing regime is allowing for larger number of students to return in the Spring.
After about 10 months, do we know yet the official cause of transmission? We are told to āsocial distanceā to prevent an increase in transmission but what actually causes it? Initially some said itās spread by sneezing but then wouldnāt the masks be enough to prevent transmissions? Is it known whether most people who have tested positive have gone without masks?
Itās the virus load, or the quantity of viruses. If the amount of viruses entering your body is large enough to overwhelm your bodyās own defenses, you become infected, whether you show symptoms or not. Wearing masks and social distancing cut down on this quantity, but not 100%. The mask on the infected is your first line of defense, the physical distance is your second line, and your own mask is your last line of defense, before these viruses enter your body.
Transmission comes primarily from respiratory droplets exhaled when an infected person breathes, talks, coughs, sneezes, sings, etc.
As injparent says, oneās case severity partly depends on the viral load they get. Droplets can travel well over 6 ft.
Many masks do not offer anything near 100% protectionā¦so wear a good mask: an n95/k95 or surgical style mask that has received FDA EUA designation. No non-medical cloth masks have this approval as they offer relatively less protection. Of course nearly any mask offers more protection than no mask.
Transmission from surfaces is thought to be low risk.