fbpx

Two new cases of COVID-19 at LDSB schools

Limestone District School Board

Limestone District School Board (LDSB) has identified two new cases of COVID-19 at two of its schools. The cases, which were identified in a release from the school board on Thursday, Dec. 10, 2020, were confirmed to be a student at Module Vanier and a staff member at Harrowsmith Public School.

Affected members of the school community have been notified.

The schools and board are working with KFL&A Public Health to identify cohorts of students, staff and others who may have been in close contact with the COVID-19 positive person at school, according to the release on the LDSB website. A positive case at a school does not mean the individual was exposed to COVID-19 at the school. They may have been exposed somewhere else in the community or outside of the KFL&A region.

LDSB stated there are currently four active cases in their schoolboard, and all schools remain open at this time.

The board says that the schools will clean and disinfect all areas in the schools where the individuals may have been, and will work with KFL&A Public Health to develop a plan to protect all students and staff and prevent the spread of COVID-19.

The school board says that parents and guardians should continue to monitor and screen their children daily for symptoms of COVID-19, and that is not necessary to have children tested at this time if they do not have symptoms of COVID-19, as testing now could lead to unnecessary or repeat testing.

0 Shares

One thought on “Two new cases of COVID-19 at LDSB schools

  • December 11, 2020 at 10:03 am
    Permalink

    At Wit’s End With Pandemic of Illogic

    “A positive case at a school does not mean the individual was exposed to COVID-19 at the school. They may have been exposed somewhere else in the community or outside of the KFL&A region.”
    With respect, this is empty verbiage. Sure. It “does not mean” that. But in absolutely equal measure, it does not *not* mean that. A positive case at Lowes does not mean the individual was exposed at Lowes. They may have been exposed somewhere else in the community, for example at school.
    First, we were told that schools could reopen safely with precious few adjustments because young kids could not catch Covid-19. (Insert eyeroll emoji here.)
    Short of having tested all or most kids (which was nowhere done), nobody was in any position to make any such assertion. Moreover, in the entire known history of viruses, sparing children would have made Covid-19 such a significant rarity as to make it virtually miraculous.
    Now, after 10 school kids have tested positive in the last week, 6 of them under 9 years old –remember when we were told 9’s-and-under didn’t need to mask?– we are told that “most cases of COVID-19 are acquired in the home setting.” (Kingstonist: LDSB reports two COVID-19 cases at separate schools: ‘No risk to students or staff’)
    Note, first, that “most” doesn’t mean “all” but just 50% plus one: that leaves lots of room for Covid acquisition in school settings.
    But what I want to know is how anybody anywhere thinks they are in any position to make any such assertion.
    There is one, and only one, way to know that any, much less most, cases of a possibly asymptomatic virus found in schools has not been acquired from a school setting: that would be to test everybody in every school setting daily, so that any contamination from outside of school could be immediately detected. This has nowhere at no time been done.
    Even if in all 10 cases, contact tracing were consistent with Covid being acquired in the home setting —perhaps all 10 were children of people who attended our Mayor’s church’s services that famously sprang an outbreak last week…, that would still be consistent with Covid being acquired within a family from the school. It’s not rocket science: Kid or Adult from Family 1 catches Covid at church; contaminates at school Kid or Adult from Family 2; Kid or Adult 2 contaminates home setting of Family 2 who also went to church but were not contaminated there. How on earth would you possibly tell that Family 2 was infected from church, or “in the home setting”, or in the community, but not from school?
    Absent universal testing, contact tracing starts with a sick person. Since kids are mostly asymptomatic, that sick person is likely an adult. The fact that we contact-trace back to a sick adult, therefore to a family setting, misses the obvious possible contamination of that setting by an asymptomatic child or adult from the school. (In fact, one sick adult works in a school.) The fact that we can’t tell that untested asymptomatic children or adults are spreading a virus in a school, is no evidence that they are not. Only testing everybody in the school daily could allow anybody to conclude that the original home setting contamination had not itself come from a school. Everyone everywhere is sharing air with people who are sharing air with kids in schools.
    So the only way it even makes any sense to utter the words: “most cases of COVID-19 are acquired in the home setting” is if kids can somehow manage to catch Covid from adults or kids “in the home setting” but somehow can neither catch it from, nor spread it to, adults or kids at school. If there is any evidence for this bizarre suggestion, provide it. If it were true, all cases, not most, would be acquired in home settings. If it were true, there would be zero reason for the school closures that occur daily worldwide, and no explanation for the surge in virus most everywhere when schools did open.
    Now, I am tolerating as well as the next person the potential assault on my immune system that the current pandemic imposes on me. Like most, I am taking steps to protect myself. What I am increasingly finding ever the more insufferable is the regular assault on Reason that the current epidemic of thoughtless, illogical rationalization is imposing on our minds. How do we protect ourselves against that? A healthy rational mind can only withstand so many comforting contradictions from local “authorities”.
    I fully appreciate that we don’t know everything, or even very much, about our circumstances. I fully understand that authorities should wish to …what did Trump say? “not cause panic”? But more panic is spread among humans by illogic than by disease. Better to say you just don’t know than to spout off bullshit (which term I use not for profanity, but technically).
    The philosopher Harry Frankfurt distinguishes bullshit from lies this way: while the liar is concerned to communicate something false as if it is true, bullshitters are indifferent to whether what they communicate is true or false. It is this blithe unconcern that distinguishes bullshit artists; whether as a result they are merely amusing or a serious menace varies from case to case.
    In the current circumstances, there is nothing redeemingly amusing about the bullshit claim that “most cases of COVID-19 are acquired in the home setting.” As if it generates spontaneously on the mushrooms in the cold cellar. (Eyeroll emoji here)

Leave a Reply