A new study suggests 3 feet, not 6 feet, is sufficient distance for school students, with mask-wearing and other safety measures kept in place.

[Threegoofs]

Look it up and paste. I dare you.

It’s basic stats, man. I work with this stuff everyday.

You look it up. I know it.

 

[vesper]

We are pretty much back to normal at my school except for the masks, cleaning all the time and sitting/standing away from each other. The kids are socializing, laughing, having a great time and learning. No one is dying. The numbers in our community are extremely low and we are all very conscious about keeping masks on and staying safe. There is no reason they shouldn’t be in school.

Finally my youngest grandchildren started back full time last week. However, the youngest is having issues with wearing the mask all day and when it finally got to her she pulled it down on her chin. The teacher told her to pull it up and granddaughter told her she needed a break because she was hot and can't breathe. That got her a trip to the principal's office and a call to her parents. My daughter-in-law gave them a earful. She told them if a child needs a couple minutes with the mask down where was it a big deal to let them go out in the hall for a couple of minutes alone so they can pull the mask down, cool off and then return to the classroom? Anyway, I am proud of the little one for standing up for herself and I am darn proud of my daughter-in-law dishing out a good dose of common sense back at them.

For the kids in my state it has pretty much been a wasted year in education. For a good part of the year their classes were online. The lessons were how should I put it? .....dumbed down? But what was a lifesaver for my grandchildren is their parents were able to higher a substitute teacher to come 4 hrs. a day during part of that time. She was amazing as she helped them with their studies as well as plan fun activities each day that focused on what they were learning. The kids absolutely loved her. She made learning so much fun. This year was her first year hired on as a full-time first grade teacher. What a heck of a year to start out as a full-time teacher. But for what she did for my grandkids during the spring/ summer of 2020, I have no doubt she was ready for the challenges that she faced.

My grandkids went to hybrid around February. One week they would be in class 2 days and the next week for three days. Finally, with just 8 weeks or so left of the school year, they went full-time. They have Spring break to look forward to as the family is heading to Florida on the Gulf coast for a week of fun where masks are optional. And this summer the beloved teacher has agreed to come everyday through the week to reinforce what each child should have learned this past year in a fun way of learning. The kids are so excited as they absolutely love her.

 

[ecofarm]

It’s basic stats, man. I work with this stuff everyday.

You look it up. I know it.

Really?

Statistically insignificant means the two groups are statistically the same. No difference. The ‘number’ is irrelevant, because it is the same as equivalent.

That's not what it means. Isn't that obvious?

 

[Threegoofs]

Really?



That's not what it means. Isn't that obvious?

I don’t know what to tell you.
But if you have a degree in a scientific discipline, you really better take a basic stats course again if you review literature.

 

[ecofarm]

I don’t know what to tell you.
But if you have a degree in a scientific discipline, you really better take a basic stats course again if you review literature.

MSc International Environmental Science
PhD(c) Interdisciplinary Ecology

You're wrong.

 

[Ethel2]

MSc International Environmental Science
PhD(c) Interdisciplinary Ecology

You're wrong.

Do either of those degrees indicate competence in statistics? I admit that I am not a statistician, but when a report says that 3ft was statistically the same as 6 ft in terms of Covid risk, to me that means there was no real difference detected.
TJ Curmudgeon posts here and he seems to have a good grasp of what "statistically insignificant" means in lay terms. Perhaps he will pick this up.

 

[ecofarm]

Do either of those degrees indicate competence in statistics? I admit that I am not a statistician, but when a report says that 3ft was statistically the same as 6 ft in terms of Covid risk, to me that means there was no real difference detected.
TJ Curmudgeon posts here and he seems to have a good grasp of what "statistically insignificant" means in lay terms. Perhaps he will pick this up.

The difference was less than 5%. In one study that lacks a conclusion.

 

[Ethel2]

The difference was less than 5%. In one study that lacks a conclusion.

Here are the words used to describe the results:


Results
Among 251 eligible school districts, 537,336 students and 99,390 staff attended in-person instruction during the 16-week study period, representing 6,400,175 student learning weeks and 1,342,574 staff learning weeks. Student case rates were similar in the 242 districts with ≥3 feet versus ≥6 feet of physical distancing between students (IRR, 0.891, 95% CI, 0.594-1.335); results were similar after adjusting for community incidence (adjusted IRR, 0.904, 95% CI, 0.616-1.325). Cases among school staff in districts with ≥3 feet versus ≥6 feet of physical distancing were also similar (IRR, 1.015, 95% CI, 0.754-1.365).

I don't see where the words "the difference was 5%" nor the words "statistically insignificant" were used at all. It said that the case rates were "similar", which, to me, means ONLY that they were not far apart, whatever that means in terms of absolute numbers. Again, I am not a statistician, but I do know that some studies turn out so close that you cannot tell if the difference in the two groups being studied were far enough apart to draw any conclusions from the study.
Regardless, IMO the extra three feet isn't going to matter much, if at all, because aerosols that escape a mask wearing child can travel quite a bit further than six feet anyway. If there was actually a small difference that has to be weighed against the risk of kids getting further behind due to distance learning.
I agree with the CDC recommendations.

 

[ecofarm]

I don't see where the words "the difference was 5%" nor the words "statistically insignificant" were used at all

Well, thanks to everyone who wasted my time. Let me know when someone calculates the additional deaths.

 

[Threegoofs]

Well, thanks to everyone who wasted my time. Let me know when someone calculates the additional deaths.

WTF?

Look at the posted numbers!

The HR was 0.89, that’s an 11% RRR, and it’s not significant. That’s student cases, deaths werent measured. Adjusted risk is similar, and risk to staff went the other direction with a 1.5% increase with more distance, but statistically insignificant.

So it’s not 5%, it’s not significant, WHICH MEANS STATISTICALLY THERE iS NO DIFFERENCE.

 

[ecofarm]

So it’s not 5%, it’s not significant, WHICH MEANS STATISTICALLY THERE iS NO DIFFERENCE.

Yelling will not make you correct. Studies that find statistically insignificant differences find differences. No one has ever claimed statistically insignificant means the same (identical, "no difference"). You need the definition.

Statistically insignificant mean differences of less than 5%. But that includes differences. Those of less than 5%.

One more time, just for fun:

Statistically insignificant difference does not mean no difference. If it was so, then why use the extra word? Why not merely "insignificant". Why qualify that with "statistically"? Because it's a measurement based on the control observation.

Let's make this simple. What was the difference in infection rates? Note: statistically insignificant doesn't answer my question.

 

[Ethel2]

Well, thanks to everyone who wasted my time. Let me know when someone calculates the additional deaths.

No problem!
Happy to participate in wasting your time!

 

[Threegoofs]

Yelling will not make you correct. Studies that find statistically insignificant differences find differences. No one has ever claimed statistically insignificant means the same (identical, "no difference"). You need the definition.

Statistically insignificant mean differences of less than 5%. But that includes differences. Those of less than 5%.

One more time, just for fun:

Statistically insignificant difference does not mean no difference. If it was so, then why use the extra word? Why not merely "insignificant". Why qualify that with "statistically"? Because it's a measurement based on the control observation.

Let's make this simple. What was the difference in infection rates? Note: statistically insignificant doesn't answer my question.

The difference in infection was posted above. Twice. If you cant figure it out, then I’m not sure why you think you’re able to understand statistical significance.
Why do a p-test if you are just gonna pretend it doesnt mean anything?

I gotta be honest - I’m kinda low key shocked here. I thought you had a handle on this basic stuff.

 

[ecofarm]

The difference in infection was posted above. Twice. If you cant figure it out, then I’m not sure why you think you’re able to understand statistical significance.
Why do a p-test if you are just gonna pretend it doesnt mean anything?

I gotta be honest - I’m kinda low key shocked here. I thought you had a handle on this basic stuff.

What was the difference?

 

[Ethel2]

Yelling will not make you correct. Studies that find statistically insignificant differences find differences. No one has ever claimed statistically insignificant means the same (identical, "no difference"). You need the definition.

Statistically insignificant mean differences of less than 5%. But that includes differences. Those of less than 5%.

One more time, just for fun:

Statistically insignificant difference does not mean no difference. If it was so, then why use the extra word? Why not merely "insignificant". Why qualify that with "statistically"? Because it's a measurement based on the control observation.

Let's make this simple. What was the difference in infection rates? Note: statistically insignificant doesn't answer my question.

I interpret “statistically insignificant “ to mean that its within the margin of error. I could be wrong but if, for example, candidate A is leading candidate B in a race by 2% but the margin of error is 5% then no conclusions can be drawn about who is actually leading.
Regardless of what it means, if adding an extra three feet of distance between students enables in person learning for a lot more kids with what seems to be minimal risk (or no risk at all) then to me, as long as its done properly, its a good tradeoff.

 

[ecofarm]

I interpret “statistically insignificant “ to mean that its within the margin of error.

We're not measuring a margin of error. We're not measuring confidence intervals. We're not measuring p-value. We're measuring the difference between observations. That is what was "statistically insignificant" (which means, precisely, less than a 5% difference in observations).

No matter what the confidence intervals or p-values, "statistically insignificant" is always "less than a 5% difference".

 

[Ethel2]

We're not measuring a margin of error. We're not measuring confidence intervals. We're not measuring p-value. We're measuring the difference between observations. That is what was "statistically insignificant" (which means, precisely, less than a 5% difference in observations).

I don’t see the term “5%” used anywhere. Seems to me that the larger the sample size the lower your “5%” becomes. Since they never mentioned 5% neither you nor I know the real increase in risk (adding three less feet between students) might present.

 

[ecofarm]

I don’t see the term “5%” used anywhere.

Look up "statistically insignificant". That's what I'm trying to tell you. The definition of the term.

 

[Threegoofs]

What was the difference?

I freaking spelled it out in my post

 

[ecofarm]

I freaking spelled it out in my post

No matter the confidence intervals or p-values, "statistically insignificant" is always "less than a 5% difference between observations".

 

[Threegoofs]

Look up "statistically insignificant". That's what I'm trying to tell you. The definition of the term.

NO! The confidence interval used (by convention) is a 95% confidence interval, meaning theres a 5 % chance either way (if its a two tailed test) that the finding is wrong.
When something is insignificant, it falls in that 5% range, meaning the chances of the result actually being different between the two groups is less than 5%.

Did you learn this 5% thing from LoP? Because he’s been dismantled on this several times.

 

[Threegoofs]

No matter the confidence intervals or p-values, "statistically insignificant" is always "less than a 5% difference between observations".

This difference was 11%. And insignificant.

 

[ecofarm]

NO! The confidence interval used (by convention) is a 95% confidence interval, meaning theres a 5 % chance either way (if its a two tailed test) that the finding is wrong.
When something is insignificant, it falls in that 5% range, meaning the chances of the result actually being different between the two groups is less than 5%.

Did you learn this 5% thing from LoP? Because he’s been dismantled on this several times.

Confidence interval and p-values don't matter. Statistically insignificant always means less than a 5% difference between observations.

 

[ecofarm]

This difference was 11%. And insignificant.

Okay. haha

 

[Threegoofs]

Confidence interval and p-values don't matter. Statistically insignificant always means less than a 5% difference between observations.

Ummm.... statistical significance is based upon a p value, which is framed by confidence intervals.