Fauci"We're finding out that it's the team sports where kids R getting together,obviously many w/o masks, that are driving

He's correct, but he's not saying that it's all team sports, but that it is more team sports than classroom activities under the present regimen. The team sports that have been the major culprits are football, basketball, wrestling, and hockey. We can see as well that in the major leagues, baseball is getting whole teams positive. There were clusters on local hs soccer teams but they appeared to be independent of the soccer activity itself. Athletes are much more likely to get it from eating team meals indoors and not wearing masks in the weight room. On the youth soccer level, a study last year of 65,000 athletes saw one possible soccer-related covid transmission, and I bet that there was another explanation for it. XC and track have very low risk except what I indicated above.

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. | NIH: National Institute of Allergy and ...

www.niaid.nih.gov

› about › anthony-s-fauci-md-bio

In a 2020 analysis of Google Scholar citations, Dr. Fauci ranked as the 32nd most-cited living researcher. According to the Web of Science, Dr. Fauci ranked 9th out of 2.5 million authors in the field of immunology by total citation count between 1980 and January 2021.

Vaccinated to protect a disease that kills about 1% maybe. My point is coming up... The average age is past that of life expectancy. 72-82 yrs depending on sources.

Polio and measles killed kids. Average age of death was 5 years. If you vaccinated all kids and only .01% has a side affect, which is a low number, is it worth it being your kid? Or your families kid? I think the risk is worth it when your protecting the deaths of 5 year olds....

humility wrote:

Vaccinated to protect a disease that kills about 1% maybe. My point is coming up... The average age is past that of life expectancy. 72-82 yrs depending on sources.

Polio and measles killed kids. Average age of death was 5 years. If you vaccinated all kids and only .01% has a side affect, which is a low number, is it worth it being your kid? Or your families kid? I think the risk is worth it when your protecting the deaths of 5 year olds....

i don't agree with it. once the population has had an opportunity to get vaccinated, I don't even think kids should be tested unless they show symptoms. Contact tracing shouldn't be necessary for the health of that particular group.

but I don't make the rules.

WHO was saying 60% to 70% for herd immunity from Covid last August.

Thus is 70% plus gat vaccinated, you can leave the rest of us alone.

Vismita: Hello and welcome to Science in 5, WHO's conversations in science. I'm Vismita Gupta-Smith. And this is a series where WHO experts will explain the science related to COVID-19, so that you can protect yourself and your loved ones. In today's show, we are talking to WHO's Chief Scientist, Dr Soumya Swaminathan and she is going to explain herd immunity. Welcome, Soumya.

Soumya: Thank you, Vismita.

Vismita: Soumya, we are hearing a lot about herd immunity. So let's start with, please tell us what is herd immunity?

Soumya: So, let's take an example, of a disease like measles, which is a very common childhood infectious illness caused by measles virus, for which there is a very effective vaccine. Now, we say that to achieve herd immunity in the population, for measles, you need about 95% of the people to have immunity or antibodies. Even if you have 5% of children not vaccinated, these others actually have enough protection in the population to prevent the measles virus from actually going from one person to the next. So it's really like having a barrier of people who are protected, who break that chain of transmission. So, you don't need every single person in the area, in the population, to necessarily be protected.

Vismita: Is it the right way to think about herd immunity in the context of COVID to say the vaccine is far away, why don't we just let everyone get infected?

Soumya: So, the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a highly transmissible virus. We think it needs at least 60 to 70% of the population to have immunity to really break the chain of transmission. If you allow this to happen naturally, it will take a long time, of course, but more importantly, it's going to do a lot of collateral damage. So even if 1% of people who get infected are ultimately going to die, then this can add up to a huge number of people, if we look at the global population. And that is why we believe it's not a good idea to try to achieve herd immunity by just letting the infection run wild in the population and infect a lot of people and that we should talk about herd immunity in the context of a vaccine.

sunflower wrote:

This is silly. For all of the "data and science" the argument here is almost completely based on speculation. Ok so 38 people (doesn't even specify that they were competitors) at wrestling tournaments (plural) in FL during the month of December tested positive. At a time when the active case rate was probably 10x what it is currently. That's probably not too far off what you would get from just a random sample of the population during that time. There's no mention of how many people they tested, what the positivity rate was, or even if they did contact tracing to determine how the people were infected.

You are exactly correct here. Speculation and assumption extracted from very weak correlations....things the Precious/Bro/Harambe's here on this site love to do on a daily basis...they are so good they will even provide you weekly related from from the wild assumptions can be justified in order to stop you from saying "hey, wait a minute....this is ridiculous". Fauci has been making hand-waving assumptions this whole year about weak correlations, he has been the MOST unscientific in the science world with the biggest voice. It is a shame what they are willing to do to the kids to maintain control of the narrative. Youth sports should go on as they have since last May with no problems to the kids what so ever. Keeping the kids isolated is probably the most dangerous thing we have done this past year.

high school xc coach wrote:

humility wrote:

Vaccinated to protect a disease that kills about 1% maybe. My point is coming up... The average age is past that of life expectancy. 72-82 yrs depending on sources.

Polio and measles killed kids. Average age of death was 5 years. If you vaccinated all kids and only .01% has a side affect, which is a low number, is it worth it being your kid? Or your families kid? I think the risk is worth it when your protecting the deaths of 5 year olds....

i don't agree with it. once the population has had an opportunity to get vaccinated, I don't even think kids should be tested unless they show symptoms. Contact tracing shouldn't be necessary for the health of that particular group.

but I don't make the rules.

I agree with this as well. Testing healthy children constantly with shoddy tests is a recipe for false disaster and emotional abuse of the children; all for no benefit other than perpetuating this nonsense. Never before have we tested healthy kids like this for a virus that does not affect them. Imagine what we would find if we tested healthy kids constantly for the flu each year....massive false chaos would ensue in the news media and politicians would be fighting day and night to "save" us from our little-personhood.

zxcvzcxv wrote:

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. | NIH: National Institute of Allergy and ...

www.niaid.nih.gov

› about › anthony-s-fauci-md-bio

In a 2020 analysis of Google Scholar citations, Dr. Fauci ranked as the 32nd most-cited living researcher. According to the Web of Science, Dr. Fauci ranked 9th out of 2.5 million authors in the field of immunology by total citation count between 1980 and January 2021.

The thing is that Fauci is not actually a researcher, he has been an admin that gets his name on papers as people kiss his butt to gain political power within labs. He does not do research anymore and likely has not for decades. This ranking means nothing regarding his knowledge other than he is the head admin of a huge agency. He know a lot about managing people and getting funding for an agency, but until this year did anyone ever go to him over all of these years for advice publicly....no, they asked the real experts further down the food chain. Fauci is a politician and he is fighting only to build his own legacy at this point. Notice how he is rarely passing the mic to let more active researchers do the talking or promote a new generation of health leaders? I guess I'll add that he is selfish, as he could have used the publicity this past year to elevate many of his peers, but he did not. Fauci is NOT a scientist and not trustworthy.