The nation’s top public health agency issued a full-throated call to reopen schools in a statement that aligned with President Trump’s pressure on communities...
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published the statement, along with new “resources and tools,” Thursday evening, two weeks after Mr. Trump criticized its earlier recommendations on school reopenings as “very tough and expensive"...
...
Mr. Trump, sinking in the polls and pummeled with criticism over his handling of the pandemic, sees reopening the nation’s schools this fall as crucial to reinvigorating the economy and to his re-election.
The new package of C.D.C. materials began with a statement titled “The Importance of Reopening America’s Schools This Fall” that repeatedly described children as being at low risk for being infected by or transmitting the virus, even though the science on both aspects is far from settled.
...
While most research suggests that children infected by the coronavirus are at low risk of becoming severely ill or dying, how often they become infected and how efficiently they spread the virus to others is not definitively known. Children in middle and high schools may also be at much higher risk of both than those under 10, according to some recent studies, a distinction the opening statement did not make.
The new statement came from a working group convened by officials at the Department of Health and Human Services after Mr. Trump made his critical comments. A federal official familiar with the group said it included minimal representation from the C.D.C., which had already written most of the other material released on Thursday.
The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an agency within the Health and Human Services Department, took the lead in writing the statement, which focuses heavily on the positive impacts on children’s mental health from going to school.
Experts on the subject at the C.D.C. were cut off from direct communication with the working group after their input on the statement was interpreted as being too cautious, the official said. Instead, the group communicated directly with the office of Dr. Robert R. Redfield, the C.D.C. director, which did seek input from experts at the agency. But the C.D.C. was by no means in charge, the official said.
...
“The goal line is to get the majority of these students back to face-to-face learning.”-Robert R. Redfield, CDC director.
...
A poll released this week by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 60 percent of parentsoverwhelmingly prefer that schools wait to restart in-person classes to reduce infection risk.
[I lined out "overwhelmingly." I don't know what "60% overwhelmingly" means. What, did the 60% shout? I do not know the work of this reporter, Abby Goodnough, good enough to let what seems to be clear miswording stand.]
...One 69-page C.D.C. document, obtained by The New York Times earlier this month, marked “For Internal Use Only,” classified as “highest risk” the full reopening of schools, just as the C.D.C.’s earlier guidance on reopening schools does.
Dr. Redfield told reporters that while the Department of Health and Human Services was responsible for the C.D.C.’s newly published schools statement...“parents and teachers and decision makers” needed to understand some of the negative consequences of keeping children home. They include putting children at higher risk of “physical, sexual, and emotional maltreatment and abuse,” the statement said.
[Not at higher risk of contracting or transmitting the Trump Virus. None of that is sickness, or transmission-related. This is bullshit, man, bullshit. It is shrewd bullshit by Trump. He now has cover: This makes CDC a full partner in his medical malfeasance. It could be called the Trump-CDC School Epidemic (but it won't). Dr. Fauci should resign.]
...
Anita Cicero, deputy director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, described the C.D.C.’s new statement as a “sales job.”
Asked on the call about the many hot spots around the country right now and whether it would be appropriate for communities with high levels of virus transmission to open schools, Dr. Redfield downplayed the extent of local outbreaks.
“A majority of the nation right now act has positivity rates [Does Abby Goodnough have a fucking editor? How about grammar check on her computer? And here she is quoting Redface; she has sneezed her word usage virus into Redface's mouth.] that are less than 5 percent, so clearly there’s many parts of our nation that are having infection rates that would not be inconsistent with our guidance,” he said.
Dr. Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, said the new guidance was thin on facts of...the risks to children of all ages, as well to school staff.
He noted that the guidance did not mention a testing strategy and dismissed the importance of screening children for symptoms.
...
Another passage stated that even in communities with “substantial, uncontrolled transmission, schools should work closely with local health officials to make decisions on whether to maintain school operations.” But for a community with that kind of outbreak, the agency separately recommends that people “shelter in place.”
“It’s nonsensical that you would ask a community to shelter in place but keep schools open,” Dr. Jha said.
[Boy oh boy. As I read that and read that I began having doubts about the objectivity of the article and the reporter. Ms. Goodnough clearly thinks this is bullshit, as I do from reading the article, but that creeps in to her reporting. Her misuse of language concerns me--"60% overwhelmingly"is literally nonsensical but the reporter's intent is to inflate the 60%. The national pediatrician's organization issued a very strongly worded statement in June emphasizing the need to reopen schools. That goes unmentioned by Ms. Goodnough. I would like to know who her source was for this article, but maybe it doesn't matter. HHS wrote it but CDC director Redfield owned it. And although Ms. Goodnough's source told her that CDC experts were "cut off" from the HHS group for "being too cautious", in the same paragraph Goodnough writes that Redfield did seek input from his experts--so they weren't really cut off, where they? Redfield's their boss! Maybe CDC should speak with one voice through its director? I don't know, seems like a plausible line of communication.So, I don't know about this article. I've quoted from it extensively and so of course will cite it but I don't do so with an "overwhelming" endorsement.]
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published the statement, along with new “resources and tools,” Thursday evening, two weeks after Mr. Trump criticized its earlier recommendations on school reopenings as “very tough and expensive"...
...
Mr. Trump, sinking in the polls and pummeled with criticism over his handling of the pandemic, sees reopening the nation’s schools this fall as crucial to reinvigorating the economy and to his re-election.
The new package of C.D.C. materials began with a statement titled “The Importance of Reopening America’s Schools This Fall” that repeatedly described children as being at low risk for being infected by or transmitting the virus, even though the science on both aspects is far from settled.
...
While most research suggests that children infected by the coronavirus are at low risk of becoming severely ill or dying, how often they become infected and how efficiently they spread the virus to others is not definitively known. Children in middle and high schools may also be at much higher risk of both than those under 10, according to some recent studies, a distinction the opening statement did not make.
The new statement came from a working group convened by officials at the Department of Health and Human Services after Mr. Trump made his critical comments. A federal official familiar with the group said it included minimal representation from the C.D.C., which had already written most of the other material released on Thursday.
The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an agency within the Health and Human Services Department, took the lead in writing the statement, which focuses heavily on the positive impacts on children’s mental health from going to school.
Experts on the subject at the C.D.C. were cut off from direct communication with the working group after their input on the statement was interpreted as being too cautious, the official said. Instead, the group communicated directly with the office of Dr. Robert R. Redfield, the C.D.C. director, which did seek input from experts at the agency. But the C.D.C. was by no means in charge, the official said.
...
“The goal line is to get the majority of these students back to face-to-face learning.”-Robert R. Redfield, CDC director.
...
A poll released this week by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 60 percent of parents
[I lined out "overwhelmingly." I don't know what "60% overwhelmingly" means. What, did the 60% shout? I do not know the work of this reporter, Abby Goodnough, good enough to let what seems to be clear miswording stand.]
...One 69-page C.D.C. document, obtained by The New York Times earlier this month, marked “For Internal Use Only,” classified as “highest risk” the full reopening of schools, just as the C.D.C.’s earlier guidance on reopening schools does.
Dr. Redfield told reporters that while the Department of Health and Human Services was responsible for the C.D.C.’s newly published schools statement...“parents and teachers and decision makers” needed to understand some of the negative consequences of keeping children home. They include putting children at higher risk of “physical, sexual, and emotional maltreatment and abuse,” the statement said.
[Not at higher risk of contracting or transmitting the Trump Virus. None of that is sickness, or transmission-related. This is bullshit, man, bullshit. It is shrewd bullshit by Trump. He now has cover: This makes CDC a full partner in his medical malfeasance. It could be called the Trump-CDC School Epidemic (but it won't). Dr. Fauci should resign.]
...
Anita Cicero, deputy director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, described the C.D.C.’s new statement as a “sales job.”
Asked on the call about the many hot spots around the country right now and whether it would be appropriate for communities with high levels of virus transmission to open schools, Dr. Redfield downplayed the extent of local outbreaks.
“A majority of the nation right now act has positivity rates [Does Abby Goodnough have a fucking editor? How about grammar check on her computer? And here she is quoting Redface; she has sneezed her word usage virus into Redface's mouth.] that are less than 5 percent, so clearly there’s many parts of our nation that are having infection rates that would not be inconsistent with our guidance,” he said.
Dr. Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, said the new guidance was thin on facts of...the risks to children of all ages, as well to school staff.
He noted that the guidance did not mention a testing strategy and dismissed the importance of screening children for symptoms.
...
Another passage stated that even in communities with “substantial, uncontrolled transmission, schools should work closely with local health officials to make decisions on whether to maintain school operations.” But for a community with that kind of outbreak, the agency separately recommends that people “shelter in place.”
“It’s nonsensical that you would ask a community to shelter in place but keep schools open,” Dr. Jha said.
[Boy oh boy. As I read that and read that I began having doubts about the objectivity of the article and the reporter. Ms. Goodnough clearly thinks this is bullshit, as I do from reading the article, but that creeps in to her reporting. Her misuse of language concerns me--"60% overwhelmingly"is literally nonsensical but the reporter's intent is to inflate the 60%. The national pediatrician's organization issued a very strongly worded statement in June emphasizing the need to reopen schools. That goes unmentioned by Ms. Goodnough. I would like to know who her source was for this article, but maybe it doesn't matter. HHS wrote it but CDC director Redfield owned it. And although Ms. Goodnough's source told her that CDC experts were "cut off" from the HHS group for "being too cautious", in the same paragraph Goodnough writes that Redfield did seek input from his experts--so they weren't really cut off, where they? Redfield's their boss! Maybe CDC should speak with one voice through its director? I don't know, seems like a plausible line of communication.So, I don't know about this article. I've quoted from it extensively and so of course will cite it but I don't do so with an "overwhelming" endorsement.]
