OMG Omicron

[Ed Vette]

and people like yourself, who in my opinion are playing Monday morning QB, is it any wonder that people are doing the wrong things and listening to the wrong people?

I'm not the one responsible for the mixed messages and changing the narrative just a few short days after getting pushback. I have repeatedly told you that instead of properly stating their intent and all the details, that they are going to and have opened the door for others to misled millions. They haven't misled me because I don't listen to or believe those who have an agenda to put down vaccines and masks but they open themselves up to have their statements put down. If the statement was simply that "we are reducing the number of days from 10 to 5 to quarantine and are reviewing what steps need to be taken once someone is asymptomatic" that would have opened the door for an update. They didn't do that and it makes them appear as though they are backtracking due to the pushback from Unions. It became a talking point.

You may not want to recognize that fact but don't accuse me as being the problem because I'm trying to make a point on a message board that 10 people read. I didn't use that tactic on you or take a shot at your motivation or to having an agenda but if this were someone else you were having this discussion with, that surely would have been the result and it would have escalated to yet another nasty fight with political statements and overtones.

[Ed Vette]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/18/politics/white-house-omicron-warning-joe-biden/index.html

Biden admin eyes a potentially stark shift in messaging around ending the pandemic

A shift toward focusing on severity instead of cases. Some of Biden's advisers are encouraging the administration to begin discussing publicly how to live alongside a virus that shows no signs of disappearing, a potentially stark shift in messaging for a White House that once touted "freedom from the virus."

Steering public attention away from the total number of infections and toward serious cases only -- as some Biden advisers have encouraged -- could prove a challenge after nearly two years of intense focus on the pandemic's every up and down. It is a part of a growing conundrum that Biden faces as the Covid-19 pandemic refuses to abate.

"We're getting to the point now where ... it's about severity," said Xavier Becerra, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, in a meeting with reporters this week. "It's not about cases. It's about severity."

[MightyGiants]

I'm not the one responsible for the mixed messages and changing the narrative just a few short days after getting pushback. I have repeatedly told you that instead of properly stating their intent and all the details, that they are going to and have opened the door for others to misled millions. They haven't misled me because I don't listen to or believe those who have an agenda to put down vaccines and masks but they open themselves up to have their statements put down. If the statement was simply that "we are reducing the number of days from 10 to 5 to quarantine and are reviewing what steps need to be taken once someone is asymptomatic" that would have opened the door for an update. They didn't do that and it makes them appear as though they are backtracking due to the pushback from Unions. It became a talking point.

You may not want to recognize that fact but don't accuse me as being the problem because I'm trying to make a point on a message board that 10 people read. I didn't use that tactic on you or take a shot at your motivation or to having an agenda but if this were someone else you were having this discussion with, that surely would have been the result and it would have escalated to yet another nasty fight with political statements and overtones.

Ed,

There are people on this forum that value their ideology more than truth and reason.   I don't consider you one of those people.  This is why I hold you to a higher standard.  The man I know you to be wouldn't so loosely toss around terms like misinformation and misleading as I have seen you do on this thread.   As I have said earlier on in this thread, I don't agree with every decision or message but I am mindful that there is a significant and important difference between having a different opinion on what was said or decided and the idea of incompetence (this is an implication of your comments, not a direct quote) and the malfeasance of lying or misleading. 

Look for many years I received yearly media spokesperson training as it relates to public health messaging during a crisis.  I also engaged in day-long exercises that involved preparing for and giving simulated (filmed press conference) and doing simulated paper interviews on the phone, as well as writing press releases.  The state even graded our work.  We were trained in how to prepare for those conferences and what we should and shouldn't say and so on.   Maybe because of that experience, I see things in a different way.  I appreciate the challenges involved.    From my experiences, I can tell you that giving pressers or speaking to the press is not as easy as it looks.   I will tell you that crafting the messages is also a far more complicated process than most people realize.  A lot of work and thought goes into what you tell and don't tell the public.  What you want to emphasize and so on. 

If Fauci is following standard practice he is not going out there winging it.  Rather that is a team of people who work on crafting the points he wants to make and what he should be saying.   On top of that when you talk to the press you have to be careful of every single sentence.  We live in an era where there are some in the press that is less than honest or are pushing political agendas.   As such you have to be careful that what you say can't be parsed and taken out of context to push a false message.   

They didn't do that and it makes them appear as though they are backtracking due to the pushback from Unions.

How did you decide that the unions held sway on this?   Did Fauci or the CDC mention the unions?   Were the unions the only entity or person that criticized the new standards?   How did the unions become a talking point?   Could that be because of the less than honest elements in the press?   

Look there was a lot that was left unsaid about the shortening of quarantine.   As a person that spent two decades in public health emergency preparedness, I know why they made this move and why it was made quickly.   Right now, take NJ.  The infection rates are over 30%.  Those kinds of infection rates can have very serious and potentially deadly consequences.   When you have that many people out sick and isolating you run the risk of shortages of critical workers.  Anyone from healthcare workers, people working in nursing homes, firefighters, utility workers, snowplow drivers, police officers, EMS, and so on.  I am pretty sure that is what drove the change and why it was done so quickly (I remember before the changing hearing reports out of NYC of closed firehouses and the like).  In our planning there the need to ensure critical services needed to keep the country going weren't interupted.

After those standards were released though, I saw a lot of pushback.  I didn't hear any unions complaining (although I assume some did) but I heard doctors and scientists and other experts stating their concerns and issues with the rules.    I have little doubt that the CDC took notice when qualified experts started questioning the wisdom and safety of the new protocols.

[Ed Vette]

Ed,

There are people on this forum that value their ideology more than truth and reason.   I don't consider you one of those people.  This is why I hold you to a higher standard.  The man I know you to be wouldn't so loosely toss around terms like misinformation and misleading as I have seen you do on this thread.   As I have said earlier on in this thread, I don't agree with every decision or message but I am mindful that there is a significant and important difference between having a different opinion on what was said or decided and the idea of incompetence (this is an implication of your comments, not a direct quote) and the malfeasance of lying or misleading. 

Look for many years I received yearly media spokesperson training as it relates to public health messaging during a crisis.  I also engaged in day-long exercises that involved preparing for and giving simulated (filmed press conference) and doing simulated paper interviews on the phone, as well as writing press releases.  The state even graded our work.  We were trained in how to prepare for those conferences and what we should and shouldn't say and so on.   Maybe because of that experience, I see things in a different way.  I appreciate the challenges involved.    From my experiences, I can tell you that giving pressers or speaking to the press is not as easy as it looks.   I will tell you that crafting the messages is also a far more complicated process than most people realize.  A lot of work and thought goes into what you tell and don't tell the public.  What you want to emphasize and so on. 

If Fauci is following standard practice he is not going out there winging it.  Rather that is a team of people who work on crafting the points he wants to make and what he should be saying.   On top of that when you talk to the press you have to be careful of every single sentence.  We live in an era where there are some in the press that is less than honest or are pushing political agendas.   As such you have to be careful that what you say can't be parsed and taken out of context to push a false message.   

How did you decide that the unions held sway on this?   Did Fauci or the CDC mention the unions?   Were the unions the only entity or person that criticized the new standards?   How did the unions become a talking point?   Could that be because of the less than honest elements in the press?   

Look there was a lot that was left unsaid about the shortening of quarantine.   As a person that spent two decades in public health emergency preparedness, I know why they made this move and why it was made quickly.   Right now, take NJ.  The infection rates are over 30%.  Those kinds of infection rates can have very serious and potentially deadly consequences.   When you have that many people out sick and isolating you run the risk of shortages of critical workers.  Anyone from healthcare workers, people working in nursing homes, firefighters, utility workers, snowplow drivers, police officers, EMS, and so on.  I am pretty sure that is what drove the change and why it was done so quickly (I remember before the changing hearing reports out of NYC of closed firehouses and the like).  In our planning there the need to ensure critical services needed to keep the country going weren't interupted.

After those standards were released though, I saw a lot of pushback.  I didn't hear any unions complaining (although I assume some did) but I heard doctors and scientists and other experts stating their concerns and issues with the rules.    I have little doubt that the CDC took notice when qualified experts started questioning the wisdom and safety of the new protocols.

The article references the unions. Maybe you should talk to the health care workers and see how they feel about this latest action. It puts their lives in jeopardy as well as their family. I have several friends who work in hospitals who are livid over this.

I

[MightyGiants]

The article references the unions. Maybe you should talk to the health care workers and see how they feel about this latest action. It puts their lives in jeopardy as well as their family. I have several friends who work in hospitals who are livid over this.

I

[Ed Vette]

Yeah, the article mentioned unions, which is part of the media's efforts to discredit President Biden and Fauci.  I say that because the first articles (after the change in protocols) ran with headlines that the changes were being criticized by experts and could lead to confusion.  Then when Fauci and the CDC say they are listening to the critics and considering modifying the rules, the media runs with "they caved to the unions" because years of demonization have left unions relatively unpopular.

It's funny you should tell me to talk to healthcare professionals.  Just last week I was literally talking about these changes with a health officer and a public health nurse who also works on the local hospital's Covid wing.  She was talking about the need for NJ to adopt the CDC standards because if they don't, "I don't know who will be left to take care of nursing home residents". As a public health nurse, she has been working closely with the many nursing homes in her jurisdiction and understood the situation we are facing as well as anyone.  So she wasn't livid as your friends were, she understand why there was a need for the changes.

So there was a damn good reason for the new rules.   In the face of strong criticism for some, Fauci and the CDC, and the Biden administration could have just held firm.   Ignored the criticism and just point out the issue the public health nurse I spoke to raised.   Only they were more willing to listen.  They said they were considering (as of yet they have not made any changes) modifying the rules to address some of the criticism.   To me that is what good leaders do, they listen to people who should be listened to.  They are mentally flexible enough that it's more important to get it right than appear to have gotten right be refusing to consider changes.

Of course they have to get it right. They have a fiduciary responsibility to get it right.

[Bob In PA]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/briefing/american-children-crisis-pandemic.html

[DaveBrown74]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/briefing/american-children-crisis-pandemic.html

I am glad the Times ran this. The toll this whole crisis has taken on children (on many levels) has been exorbitant. While I appreciate an support the need for caution, forcing young kids to wear masks every second of the day in schools where there are already vax mandates presents an enormous cost both to learning and social development. And of course, this is all on the heels of what was basically a lost year for many children who had to stay at home and "learn" and "develop" watching a screen on a laptop by themselves. I'm not saying that that should not have happened. I am simply pointing out that the costs are immense. A single missed (or very insufficient) year alone is a huge deal for a child. And this is continuing. I cannot imagine what the after-effects will be on many of these kids later in life.

I don't know what the perfect answer is for all of this, both presently and moving forward, but I am not sure that enough balanced thought or holistic consideration is put into this issue in this part of the country. I have no issue with masks in general and wear mine all the time. In fact I probably wear mine more than most of my peers. However I am a middle aged adult and am long since removed from my formative years. I just hope public policy makers remain extremely nimble around ongoing developments and that relaxing of various restrictions is as thoughtful as the imposition of them has been.

[MightyGiants]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/briefing/american-children-crisis-pandemic.html

It's articles like this that are why I saw the NY Times no longer is the bastion of high-quality journalism it once was.   The sad thing is that I actually agree with many of the points in the article.  I also think it's an issue worthy of discussion and exploring.    Where I had an issue was that the article didn't provide the sort of balanced discussion and examination of both sides of the issue.   The author clearly had a viewpoint and used techniques often subtle but not impossible to spot to slant this article to only one side of the issue.  I say that as someone who is acutely aware of the impact Covid is having on school children as it's part of my job.  However, the author covered pretty much every conceivable point that favored his point of view but badly ignored the issues that didn't.   

Nowhere in the article did the author discuss the impact on children who lose one or both of their caregivers to Covid (Covid that they may have even been introduced into the household via school)

There was no public health-based discussion on how schools historically have been a major vector for the spread of communicable disease

Nowhere in the article was there a mention that Omicron is hitting children harder

So beyond some of the loaded claims like people are choosing to harm children, there is a lot of important points (I only touched on a few of them).

There was no mention of the safety and welfare of the teachers and staff

From my perspective, the school remote vs in-person is not an easy answer and certainly isn't one size fits all.   Also, I am strongly in favor of mask mandates and I don't have a problem with vaccine mandates as a way to allow children the best way to safely return to as close as normal as possible.

With the current surge of Omicron, I would not even think to fault school opting for temporary remote learning.   I really like the idea in some schools of having the option of remote and in person at the discretion of the parents.   If there is an area of the country that has been less impacted (at least currently) I see merit in having in-person learning.   I also think schools with in-person learning should be a temporary halt to extracurricular activities until this Omicron spike cools down.

I will add one other major point the author failed to bring up and certainly should have.  Not all the stress and issues facing children are due to the schools.    We are living in extremely stressful times with people dying, getting deathly ill, etc.   I don't think anyone has escaped or could escape the increased stresses of this deadly pandemic. 

I think Covid and the impact on children is a very important issue, and certainly worthy of discussion.   It's a shame the author thought his agenda was more important than his duty as a journalist to provide all the information and all the important points and perspectives and avoided hyperbolic and loaded commentary designed to push a point of view instead of educating, enlightening, and get people thinking about the issue.

[Bob In PA]

There is a tug-of-war between two branches of medicine.  I'd rather see this type of issue presented via "pro" and "con" opinion pieces (side by side) rather than as a "news" article.  Bob

[MightyGiants]

There is a tug-of-war between two branches of medicine.  I'd rather see this type of issue presented via "pro" and "con" opinion pieces (side by side) rather than as a "news" article.  Bob

What are they tug-of-warring over?   Also what are the two branches you are referring to?

[MightyGiants]

I saw an excellent interview with the director of the CDC (an extremely well-qualified person).  The CDC director doesn't seem to be out there nearly enough, in my opinion.   It's a 3 parter and I think it's an excellent interview and well worth the time to see/listen to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrwGlIjugY0&t=5s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knYww0_T79c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1QYThCIAyM

[Bob In PA]

What are they tug-of-warring over?   Also what are the two branches you are referring to?

Rich: Sorry about that... I was referring to striking a balance between the physical and mental health aspects of pediatric health care.  Bob

[Ed Vette]

My niece is teaching 7th graders in her first year as an educator in the Bronx near Fordham. She is teaching children who have had learning or behavioral issues, come from broken homes and troubled family environments. Many of these children are not vaccinated as their parents aren't. If they don't wear masks, it exposes her to danger.

Going remote should be the last resort as she told me that half her class would likely not pay attention. She constantly has to get them focused in class. It's these type of children who suffer the most by remote. This is also a grade where they have to get into a good school at the next level and their grades will determine that. Many of them came to her with reading disabilities and poor attitudes about education. They all love her but it's been extremely stressful for her. Her choice as she wanted this challenge and to give back. Removing masks or remote learning in this environment should not be how she should be rewarded.

[MightyGiants]

I will add I have heard some school districts are taking the "first 2 weeks remote" so that the holiday surge from the holidays doesn't blow up the schools in terms of outbreaks.   I have to say there is merit in the idea, even with the negatives.   One of the other issues not mentioned in the article is how a school or classroom can be completely disrupted by an outbreak.    You get a bunch of kids infected and exposed they will have to stay home and if you don't have remote learning options they fall behind even worse.  Remote learning may not be as good as in-person but no learning is certainly the worst.