4 ms·

This is complete historical revisionism. For basically the entire time that schools were remote and weeks after, any time a school tried to open so many teacher

This is complete historical revisionism. For basically the entire time that schools were remote and weeks after, any time a school tried to open so many teachers became sick that operating the school became infeasible. It was a choice between sick and dead teachers (and some children) with unknown future consequences and schools shut down without staff, or schools shut down to do remote schooling with significantly lower mortality rates. We saw what your proposed solution did when the policies were abandoned; millions of people died and are still dying, and life expectancy in the US is still 2-6 years below what it was four years ago. That has wiped out 20-40 years of improvements to life expectancy in the US, depending on the population under discussion.

enslavedrobot 3y ago
Huh, my kids went back to school in September of 2020 here in Vancouver British Columbia. There was a short shutdown later in the fall, then schools were open for the duration. No teachers died, and there was very little in school transmission. Our provincial health officer in charge made the choice based on the data available. BC has a very low overall COVID death rate compared to other jurisdictions. You can go look up the data on deaths and satisfy yourself that closing schools as long as many jurisdictions did was a stupid idea. The idea that we didn't know that at the time is also suspect, since data driven decision makers like the one in BC opened schools back up once the risk of transmission between children was determined.
- skinnymuch 3y ago
  To be fair, the person was talking about the US and more likely they were talking about the region they are from.