Coronavirus - Doomsday

[TimHauck 2,918]

16 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

thank you for fixing my math

like I said when I put it in my calculator it says 0.0009 etc

id say going from 0.085 to 0.12 is still insignificant as a base

1) that’s not insignificant.  If those numbers were applied to 100 million people of which 50mil were vaxx’ed and 50 mil were unvaxxed, that’s over 20,000 lives saved.

2) and that’s only assuming a 32% VE against death, it’s at least double that 

,

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

Extended lockdowns and wearing masks did not harm kids? Sorry I don’t have a link. I’ll go ahead and rely on my observations.  

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Extended lockdowns and wearing masks did not harm kids. 

Share your evidence on the fact that kids in red states were not harmed as much. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

And never forget it was the teachers unions that kept schools closed and had them wearing masks well after that had proven to be useless. 

[jerryskids 6,838]

40 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Share your evidence on the fact that kids in red states were not harmed as much. 

It will take some time to gauge the extent of the damage, and even then I expect the liberal education complex to bury/obfuscate the data -- we can't have parents think they harmed kids by masking and socially isolating them, can we?

This ties to what I planned to respond to @TimHauck:  I don't think you can use deaths per capita as the sole criteria; by that metric places like China knocked it out of the park.  A big part of the problem is that we gave Fauci too much control; he should have been more of an adviser whose input, along with other non-CoVID-medical input, as part of an overall holistic approach.  In that regard I don't really blame Fauci -- to him, he is a hammer and all problems are a Covid nail.  Well, other than lying about masks (as you stated) and laundering money thru a 3rd party to fund Gain of Function research at Wuhan (most likely).  But as @nobodymentioned, easing the load on hospitals became zero deaths became zero hospitalizations became zero cases mindsets.

 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

It will take some time to gauge the extent of the damage, and even then I expect the liberal education complex to bury/obfuscate the data -- we can't have parents think they harmed kids by masking and socially isolating them, can we?

This ties to what I planned to respond to @TimHauck:  I don't think you can use deaths per capita as the sole criteria; by that metric places like China knocked it out of the park.  A big part of the problem is that we gave Fauci too much control; he should have been more of an adviser whose input, along with other non-CoVID-medical input, as part of an overall holistic approach.  In that regard I don't really blame Fauci -- to him, he is a hammer and all problems are a Covid nail.  Well, other than lying about masks (as you stated) and laundering money thru a 3rd party to fund Gain of Function research at Wuhan (most likely).  But as @nobodymentioned, easing the load on hospitals became zero deaths became zero hospitalizations became zero cases mindsets.

 

So we can't measure it, we might never know the answers....but we can state it as fact and handwave it away as "liberals burying data."

 

[Strike 5,590]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Sure, are the court documents tweeted out by the Missouri AG sufficient enough for you?

 

Gonna admit you were wrong (again)?

 

1)  The document in the tweet you quoted says State of Missourri vs. Joe Biden, so I have no idea WTF you're talking about.  I didn't read the entire document since the plaintiffs are the first thing listed and it's very small and difficult to read.  Please quote specifically where it says this Dr guy is a plaintiff.

2)  Saying I doubt someone is a plaintiff and asking for supporting evidence wouldn't make me "wrong" if he were.  And certainly wouldn't make me "wrong" AGAIN since you've never shown me to be wrong in the past.  EVER    It would mean I questioned it and you provided evidence.  I'm truly curious but again you fall short. 

[jerryskids 6,838]

9 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

So we can't measure it, we might never know the answers....but we can state it as fact and handwave it away as "liberals burying data."

 

We'll have some metrics like test scores which will be difficult to fudge; emotional and social impacts will be much more difficult to measure, and thus easier to obfuscate.  

It boggles my mind that a teacher of children can be so oblivious to the impact of social and facial isolation on developing children.  Like, I don't even know how to have a discussion on it.  

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

Closing schools and masking were harmful to children.  Those states that did it less did a good thing, less harm to kids. Those states that did it more harmed children , be seen they put the teachers unions in charge. 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

We'll have some metrics like test scores which will be difficult to fudge; emotional and social impacts will be much more difficult to measure, and thus easier to obfuscate.  

It boggles my mind that a teacher of children can be so oblivious to the impact of social and facial isolation on developing children.  Like, I don't even know how to have a discussion on it.  

Once again there you go making the argument something I didn't say. Also, I appreciate that you are trying to work something concrete into the discussion that was more abstract. It is changing the parameters of the discussion midstream.

But here are the things you would need to prove in the course of your argument you want to have:

You would need to know the way those students were socially and emotionally prior to COVID. I understand the impact and potential of how these things affect kids- the same way that lots of things affect kids- things you don't seem to be banging drums over. 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Closing schools and masking were harmful to children.  Those states that did it less did a good thing, less harm to kids. Those states that did it more harmed children , be seen they put the teachers unions in charge. 

Prove that other than just spouting off bullsh!t feelings

[dogcows 1,030]

2 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so based on this ages 45-54 91/100000 or 0.00091% mortality rate

now for simplicity lets round that to 100/100000 or 0.001%

we know more people with the vaccine are dying than without

68% of people are vaccinated, although I cant find the actual number for this age group, but for this we will use just that number

58% of people dying are vaccinated according to previously posted article

so out of every 100 deaths 58 are vaccinated while 42 are not (are you following me, is my math correct so far)

again I am not trying to say end all be all, but this is the logic I am following

2/3 of people are vaccinated, 1/3 not (for easy numbers, so 67/33 per 100)

so your odds of dying with the vaccine are 58/100000 or 0.00058% and without are 42/100 or 0.00042% (this is where my math gets fuzzy edit:) I am not clarifying my numbers correctly because I am not sure how to factor in the 2/3 1/3.  obviously what I am stating is that more die without the vaccine than with, however that number itself is insignificantly small and well with in the range of error

therefore taking the vaccine increases your chance of survival insignificantly.  0.00016% increase in survival rate

 

 

Not only are you looking at data that only covers a very short timeframe, but you are comparing absolute numbers instead of percentages.

A simplistic example: If you have 100 people, 90 are vaccinated, and 10 aren’t… then 2 unvaccinated people die, and 3 vaccinated people die… sure, more vaccinated people died; 60% of all deaths! But they outnumber the unvaccinated 9-to-1. Percentage wise, the rate is much higher for unvaccinated.

Here’s some background from Scientific American on how to better understand these kinds of numbers. Spoiler? Death rates are far higher for the unvaccinated.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,361]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Not only are you looking at data that only covers a very short timeframe, but you are comparing absolute numbers instead of percentages.

A simplistic example: If you have 100 people, 90 are vaccinated, and 10 aren’t… then 2 unvaccinated people die, and 3 vaccinated people die… sure, more vaccinated people died; 60% of all deaths! But they outnumber the unvaccinated 9-to-1. Percentage wise, the rate is much higher for unvaccinated.

Here’s some background from Scientific American on how to better understand these kinds of numbers. Spoiler? Death rates are far higher for the unvaccinated.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/

so unvaccinated are dying at higher rates now than during the peak of the pandemic before we even had the magical bestest ever vaccine?

mkay

 

 

[TimHauck 2,918]

23 minutes ago, Strike said:

1)  The document in the tweet you quoted says State of Missourri vs. Joe Biden, so I have no idea WTF you're talking about.  I didn't read the entire document since the plaintiffs are the first thing listed and it's very small and difficult to read.  Please quote specifically where it says this Dr guy is a plaintiff.

2)  Saying I doubt someone is a plaintiff and asking for supporting evidence wouldn't make me "wrong" if he were.  And certainly wouldn't make me "wrong" AGAIN since you've never shown me to be wrong in the past.  EVER    It would mean I questioned it and you provided evidence.  I'm truly curious but again you fall short. 

Strike: can you show me where it lists Dr. Kheriaty as a plaintiff?

Also Strike: I see that you shared a list of the plaintiffs, but I didn’t read it.

lol, literally can’t make this stuff up, gotta love the GC.

Also lol at “it’s very small.”  Are you 80 years old?

[dogcows 1,030]

1 minute ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so unvaccinated are dying at higher rates now than during the peak of the pandemic before we even had the magical bestest ever vaccine?

mkay

 

 

I didn’t say that. Read the actual data instead; I linked it for you. If you’re on a computer, move the cursor on your mouse over the link, then click it. If you’re on a tablet or phone, touch it with your finger. Hope you can figure that out.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

Someone told me there’s a debate if the school lockdowns were actually bad for the kids? Do I have that right? 

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Someone told me there’s a debate if the school lockdowns were actually bad for the kids? Do I have that right? 

You were asked for evidence. That isn't a debate. It is just saying let's see your rationale. 

So as per usual- no you have nothing right. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

The sky is blue 

[Strike 5,590]

7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

You were asked for evidence. That isn't a debate. It is just saying let's see your rationale. 

So as per usual- no you have nothing right. 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/test-scores-show-how-covid-set-kids-back-across-the-u-s

[Strike 5,590]

26 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Strike: can you show me where it lists Dr. Kheriaty as a plaintiff?

Also Strike: I see that you shared a list of the plaintiffs, but I didn’t read it.

lol, literally can’t make this stuff up, gotta love the GC.

Also lol at “it’s very small.”  Are you 80 years old?

Wow, what a d*ck.  Yes, looking at a couple pages of a legal document embedded in a tweet on a 14" laptop screen with 56 year old eyes is difficult.  The link only has a couple of pages of the document and I don't see where it lists a bunch of individuals.  I see at the top of the doc where it says the lawsuit is the state of Missouri against Joe Biden.  Post a link to the actual PDF so I can open it in a proper PDF reader, or specify WHERE in the document it has this list of plaintiffs you claim it does.  Otherwise, STFU.

[jerryskids 6,838]

43 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Once again there you go making the argument something I didn't say. Also, I appreciate that you are trying to work something concrete into the discussion that was more abstract. It is changing the parameters of the discussion midstream.

But here are the things you would need to prove in the course of your argument you want to have:

You would need to know the way those students were socially and emotionally prior to COVID. I understand the impact and potential of how these things affect kids- the same way that lots of things affect kids- things you don't seem to be banging drums over. 

JFC, this is why it is impossible to have a discussion with you; you type a bunch of word salad which goes nowhere.

Since you are incapable of an intelligent discussion, I'll type out yes/no questions like you are a child, let's see how that works:  do you believe it negatively impacted the social and emotional development of children, yes or no?

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

11 minutes ago, Strike said:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/test-scores-show-how-covid-set-kids-back-across-the-u-s

I don't doubt that scores regressed. I know they did. But that wasn't the discussion. 

The topic was that the red states kids were better because schools opened faster than in blue states. I asked for evidence of that. 

[TimHauck 2,918]

7 minutes ago, Strike said:

Wow, what a d*ck.  Yes, looking at a couple pages of a legal document embedded in a tweet on a 14" laptop screen with 56 year old eyes is difficult.  The link only has a couple of pages of the document and I don't see where it lists a bunch of individuals.  I see at the top of the doc where it says the lawsuit is the state of Missouri against Joe Biden.  Post a link to the actual PDF so I can open it in a proper PDF reader, or specify WHERE in the document it has this list of plaintiffs you claim it does.  Otherwise, STFU.

JFC.  It’s 2 f’ing pages.  But if you insist, footnote #2 where it says “plaintiffs”…

BTW, I guess your 56-year old brain is also forgetting about the North Dakota teenager killed by crazy lib thread where I most recently proved you wrong…

[Strike 5,590]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

I don't doubt that scores regressed. I know they did. But that wasn't the discussion. 

The topic was that the red states kids were better because schools opened faster than in blue states. I asked for evidence of that. 

Okay, follow my logic here.  Can we agree that kids learn better in classroom situations comparted to remotely?  I would hope so.  Otherwise what is the value of brick and mortal schools?  If that's the case and we know that scores regressed during Covid, wouldn't it follow that any schools that opened sooner would see less of a negative impact from Covid than schools that stayed locked down longer?  That just seems logical to me.

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

JFC, this is why it is impossible to have a discussion with you; you type a bunch of word salad which goes nowhere.

Since you are incapable of an intelligent discussion, I'll type out yes/no questions like you are a child, let's see how that works:  do you believe it negatively impacted the social and emotional development of children, yes or no?

You know what Jerry- go fook yourself. You jump into conversations and say stupid asinine things that change the aspects of the discussion and then get mad when confronted about it. This is so typical of what you do- every single stinkin' time you decide to white knight your way into a conversation. 

Here is a simple yes/no question for you: do you have data that would show the emotional and social aspects of the students prior to COVID? (NOTE: because you are too stupid to understand otherwise- I'm not debating the social effects of COVID. I know there were some- I'm on the front lines of it. I'm saying it is not as cut and dry as that though considering many of those students were in a bad spot pre COVID.) But simple minds like you guys want easy solutions to assign blame too. 

[Strike 5,590]

5 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

JFC.  It’s 2 f’ing pages.  But if you insist, footnote #2 where it says “plaintiffs”…

BTW, I guess your 56-year old brain is also forgetting about the North Dakota teenager killed by crazy lib thread where I most recently proved you wrong…

1)  Holy fock.  You really are a d*ck.  The footnotes are the smallest things on that focking page.  But yes, it does claim that whackadoodle Dr. is a plaintiff.  You got me there LOL.

2)  You never proved me wrong about anything, certainly not about the North Dakota teen.  You're a lieing POS.  I'm not shocked.

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

6 minutes ago, Strike said:

Okay, follow my logic here.  Can we agree that kids learn better in classroom situations comparted to remotely?  I would hope so.  Otherwise what is the value of brick and mortal schools?  If that's the case and we know that scores regressed during Covid, wouldn't it follow that any schools that opened sooner would see less of a negative impact from Covid than schools that stayed locked down longer?  That just seems logical to me.

Yes I do think kids would do better in a classroom in a general sense. Are there mitigating circumstances or more variables than just that? Yes.

Now- follow my logic here: If that is the case it should be very easy to find evidence that proves scores in red states were better than blue states during COVID since the whole premise presented was

Quote

Red states schools were open and they lifted the lockdowns way before the blue ones did. Much better job. At least the kids in the red states weren’t harmed as much. Winning. 

as presented by professional window licker HT.

 

When asked for evidence it is just that same window licker declaring himself a winner and jerry saying "Well the leftists own education and would obfuscate that data anyway." And then trying to turn this from a "feelings" argument into tangible things that do not follow the original premise anyway. Those are not counterpoints or evidence. Those are delusional ramblings of morons. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

There is no doubt that the school lockdowns had a negative impact on children, academically and socially/ mental health wise.  This is not up for debate. And the longer the lockdowns were in place the worse it was for the kids. We should really be asking why, not if at this point. Why did certain areas stay locked down much longer than other paces, and on who’s behalf? It certainly wasn’t on the kids behalf. 

[TimHauck 2,918]

3 hours ago, nobody said:

Do we need it?  People weren't dying in the streets because hospitals were packed with covid patients.  All you really need is a graph showing which economies shrink the most.

Can you share data on which state economies shrunk the most?  I don’t doubt it’s led by ones with the most restrictions, but I know for example in 2020 Sweden actually saw a pretty comparable GDP decline to its neighbors

[TimHauck 2,918]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

1)  Holy fock.  You really are a d*ck.  The footnotes are the smallest things on that focking page.  But yes, it does claim that whackadoodle Dr. is a plaintiff.  You got me there LOL.

2)  You never proved me wrong about anything, certainly not about the North Dakota teen.  You're a lieing POS.  I'm not shocked.

Please hold

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

NY lost 14 billion to fraudulent unemployed claims during Covid. Hope we get a bailout on that. Lol. 

[jerryskids 6,838]

5 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

You know what Jerry- go fook yourself. You jump into conversations and say stupid asinine things that change the aspects of the discussion and then get mad when confronted about it. This is so typical of what you do- every single stinkin' time you decide to white knight your way into a conversation. 

Here is a simple yes/no question for you: do you have data that would show the emotional and social aspects of the students prior to COVID? (NOTE: because you are too stupid to understand otherwise- I'm not debating the social effects of COVID. I know there were some- I'm on the front lines of it. I'm saying it is not as cut and dry as that though considering many of those students were in a bad spot pre COVID.) But simple minds like you guys want easy solutions to assign blame too. 

Apparently yes/no questions are difficult for you.  Let me parse your answer for anyone trying to follow along in English.  You think there were some impacts, being on the front lines and all.  But since we didn't do a baseline analysis of emotional state of every child prior to Covid, we'll never know exactly how much.  And as such, bringing it up in a discussion of which states handled Covid better is stoopid.

Because this is what I did that you accuse me of "jumping in and saying stupid asinine things that change the aspects of the discussion."  I gave out a well-thought-out and polite response to you and several others, you responded with a Dr Evil video, I responded to THAT politely, and you were still an ass.  Why don't you sit on a baseball bat and spin around; you might like how it feels, and the dizziness should help you post more intelligently.   

[jerryskids 6,838]

9 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Yes I do think kids would do better in a classroom in a general sense. Are there mitigating circumstances or more variables than just that? Yes.

Now- follow my logic here: If that is the case it should be very easy to find evidence that proves scores in red states were better than blue states during COVID since the whole premise presented was

as presented by professional window licker HT.

 

When asked for evidence it is just that same window licker declaring himself a winner and jerry saying "Well the leftists own education and would obfuscate that data anyway." And then trying to turn this from a "feelings" argument into tangible things that do not follow the original premise anyway. Those are not counterpoints or evidence. Those are delusional ramblings of morons. 

What.  in the hell.  Is this?  I said that test scores are objective (technically, I said "difficult to fudge"), but that emotional/social impacts are more difficult to measure and hence can be obfuscated.  Why is this impact irrelevant to the discussion?  Then you blather around until finally admitting, in Mooney-speak, that it probably had impacts, but we'll never know exactly how much so YAHTZEE$#@!

Dear lord I wonder how you manage to function during the day.   

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Apparently yes/no questions are difficult for you.  Let me parse your answer for anyone trying to follow along in English.  You think there were some impacts, being on the front lines and all.  But since we didn't do a baseline analysis of emotional state of every child prior to Covid, we'll never know exactly how much.  And as such, bringing it up in a discussion of which states handled Covid better is stoopid.

Because this is what I did that you accuse me of "jumping in and saying stupid asinine things that change the aspects of the discussion."  I gave out a well-thought-out and polite response to you and several others, you responded with a Dr Evil video, I responded to THAT politely, and you were still an ass.  Why don't you sit on a baseball bat and spin around; you might like how it feels, and the dizziness should help you post more intelligently.   

You've been a jackass to me numerous times in discussions despite you thinking you are some poor little old defender of whatever idiotic idea slips past your synapses. 

Let me be clear for you- because even though you still won't get it, someone might- kids have been struggling for a number of reasons for the years prior to COVID. The lockdowns just allowed the people (who don't know any better) to create a boogeyman to attack and scream "Won't someone think of the children," as if they were caring what happened for years now. I don't care about your performance idea of worry because it is phony and the arguments put forward in here by others- and validated- by you are not based in reality. They are based in "feelings."

I'm sure in your mind calling something the "liberal education complex" is fair and everything but it just smacks of condescension and douchebaggery. 

[jerryskids 6,838]

5 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

You've been a jackass to me numerous times in discussions despite you thinking you are some poor little old defender of whatever idiotic idea slips past your synapses. 

Let me be clear for you- because even though you still won't get it, someone might- kids have been struggling for a number of reasons for the years prior to COVID. The lockdowns just allowed the people (who don't know any better) to create a boogeyman to attack and scream "Won't someone think of the children," as if they were caring what happened for years now. I don't care about your performance idea of worry because it is phony and the arguments put forward in here by others- and validated- by you are not based in reality. They are based in "feelings."

I'm sure in your mind calling something the "liberal education complex" is fair and everything but it just smacks of condescension and douchebaggery. 

So, I've been a meanie to you before.  Gotcha.

Also, people can't comment about the impact of Covid on children because... they haven't commented enough on other impacts on children in the past?  I think, this one is tougher.  And never mind the numerous times we've discussed how we are raising a participation trophy generation of kids who can't deal with adversity, or the discussions about kids being confused and crying out for help and the "adult" response is to just accept whatever gender (or animal or whatever) they say they are?

I seem to have struck a nerve with the "liberal education complex;" it isn't surprising that you don't see it.

[Sean Mooney 1,984]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

So, I've been a meanie to you before.  Gotcha.

Also, people can't comment about the impact of Covid on children because... they haven't commented enough on other impacts on children in the past?  I think, this one is tougher.  And never mind the numerous times we've discussed how we are raising a participation trophy generation of kids who can't deal with adversity, or the discussions about kids being confused and crying out for help and the "adult" response is to just accept whatever gender (or animal or whatever) they say they are?

I seem to have struck a nerve with the "liberal education complex;" it isn't surprising that you don't see it.

If you want to stick to the stupid talking points fine...have at it. It is just you showing how detached you are on this.

And I've said this before- there are lots of things wrong in schools- some from Republican policy, some from Democratic policy, and a lot of it from state and local level "leadership." That is the reality of it. 

You don't offend me by saying "liberal education complex." You offend me by saying it and then saying "I was offering polite responses." No you were being a and you are too cowardly to own up to it. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,511]

Breakdown is one of my favorite Tom Petty songs. 

[TimHauck 2,918]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

It will take some time to gauge the extent of the damage, and even then I expect the liberal education complex to bury/obfuscate the data -- we can't have parents think they harmed kids by masking and socially isolating them, can we?

This ties to what I planned to respond to @TimHauck:  I don't think you can use deaths per capita as the sole criteria; by that metric places like China knocked it out of the park.  A big part of the problem is that we gave Fauci too much control; he should have been more of an adviser whose input, along with other non-CoVID-medical input, as part of an overall holistic approach.  In that regard I don't really blame Fauci -- to him, he is a hammer and all problems are a Covid nail.  Well, other than lying about masks (as you stated) and laundering money thru a 3rd party to fund Gain of Function research at Wuhan (most likely).  But as @nobodymentioned, easing the load on hospitals became zero deaths became zero hospitalizations became zero cases mindsets.

 

To be fair, the “least learning loss among children” shouldn’t be the primary metric either.  IMO it should be some sort of combination of that, excess deaths and economic performance.   

I’m not sure if this data is correct as it’s from someone with 20-something followers, but does seem to indicate schools that opened soonest did the best:

 

 

 

[jerryskids 6,838]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

To be fair, the “least learning loss among children” shouldn’t be the primary metric either.  IMO it should be some sort of combination of that, excess deaths and economic performance.   

I’m not sure if this data is correct as it’s from someone with 20-something followers, but does seem to indicate schools that opened soonest did the best:

 

 

 

Thanks, glad to have an intelligent discussion on this.  If I implied that learning loss should be the top criterion, I apologize.  I don't know exactly how the metrics should be weighted.  My personal opinion is that the biggest impact was the emotional and social development of children, particularly very young children -- we already have a significant problem of kids spending time on their devices vs. with actual people, and our policies exacerbated it.

I do think there is more to it than Covid deaths per capita though, and glad to see you agree.   

[TimHauck 2,918]

52 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Thanks, glad to have an intelligent discussion on this.  If I implied that learning loss should be the top criterion, I apologize.  I don't know exactly how the metrics should be weighted.  My personal opinion is that the biggest impact was the emotional and social development of children, particularly very young children -- we already have a significant problem of kids spending time on their devices vs. with actual people, and our policies exacerbated it.

I do think there is more to it than Covid deaths per capita though, and glad to see you agree.   

IMO it’s TBD what the “most important” metric is.  It’s possible kids will be able to make up that learning loss in the coming years.  But all the dead people aren’t coming back.  

I have very young kids.  Yeah, they missed out on some things that they would have done pre-pandemic but at this point they seem pretty caught up and I’m not sure they really even remember there was a worldwide pandemic going on (insert “it was just a flu” joke here).   However, their grandmother (not particularly healthy but under 60) very nearly died of Covid in March 2020, which was the main reason I started taking it so seriously.  As a result of that experience, she ended up moving from a different state to 3 minutes away.   To my kids, I think having their grandmother around is a bigger impact on their lives than having to wear a mask in school (fortunately I didn’t have to deal with remote schooling as my oldest went to kindergarten in 2021-2022).

And for the record my bet is 95% of the learning loss is from remote schooling, not wearing masks. Honestly as far as kids go I think the youngest may have been the least impacted.  I’d theorize that middle school age likely had the worst learning loss, as they were old enough to be learning important things, but maybe not old enough to be able to fully grasp remote learning.  But maybe the ones I feel for the most were those in high school/college who basically missed out on some key years in their lives.  If there was one setting that should have employed the GBD strategy, it was college dorm rooms…