Hi Mac,My understanding of transmission risk is based on information from mainstream epidemiologists, not surveys. As a scientist not working in epidemiology, I'm curious for expert information and seek it out. Believe it or not, I still think our position is appropriate and responsible. I'm aware of these studies and the information you shared, but thank you for mentioning them. I'm happy to continue this conversation offline, but I'd hope you refrain from making assumptions in the future about what people understand.LauraOn Sat, Jan 7, 2023 at 3:27 PM Walker Sloan <sloan@medevelop.com> wrote:
"Our understanding on transmission risks..." Surveys reflect
preferences, not science.
Science: In Nov '22, per the CDC, bivalent boosted people had 1/3rd the
chance of testing positive. This means that requiring bivalent boosters
will dramatically cut the number of positives dancing in your hall.
See attachment. Light green box at the bottom.
With XBB.1.5 this number has yet to be determine. But odds are there
will be a good effect.
Do vaxes prevent Covid? No, but the odds of Covid producing a bad
outcome in vaxed and boosted people go WAY down: Testing positive,
transmitting, hospitalization, death -- WAY down.
Holding dances for unvaxed people not only endangers them, but ALSO the
folks they go home to and go to work with.
Holding unvaxed or vax-optional dances prolongs the pandemic.
Regardless of surveys or understandings.
Mac Sloan
On 23/01/07 2:07 PM, Laura Alexander wrote:
> Arden contra (in Delaware) has a policy that's very similar to
> Montelier's, and for the same reasons. We surveyed this fall and dropped
> our vaccine requirement, and we'll survey our community again this
> month. Without a significant change to our understanding on transmission
> risk difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, we won't
> consider re-excluding unvaccinated people. If it's not safe enough to
> dance for community conditions and hospitals, we'll postpone dances.
>
> Whole policy:
>
> - vaccines strongly encouraged
> - masks required
> - hall with excellent ventilation
> - contact tracing with mandatory info collection, system run by a
> responsible person outside the community, announced at the dance and in
> a follow-up email
> - announcement that if anyone feels sick after the dance, we expect them
> to get tested ASAP
> - rapid tests available to those without access
>
> Thankfully we haven't had any known transmission yet since restarting in
> March 2022. We average around 40 attendees per dance.
>
> I agree with Julian, I hope every local area has a space that's
> taking all precautions available, and it also makes sense to me to have
> mask-optional dances if there is no foreseeable change to covid risk.
>
> Thanks for the thread, everyone - it's useful to see what other dances
> are doing.
> Laura Alexander
>
> On Sat, Jan 7, 2023 at 12:13 AM Walker Sloan via Organizers
> <organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
>
> Another pebble in the pond --
>
> * Current booster verified
> * N95, KN95, KF94 required
> * Request cases to be reported back to the organizers
> * Emails collected to report cases anonymously to the community
> * Max venue ventilation -- cold drafts this time of year in the North
>
> NONE of these is sufficient to prevent Covid. ALL of them help reduce
> transmission.
>
> None of us organizers volunteered to be public health officials. And
> certainly not protocol cops. But it makes sense for us to STACK THE
> ODDS as high as possible in favor of COMMUNITY health.
>
> Maximizing community safety takes precedence over individual preference.
>
> That's the most responsible way to organize a dance. Not just for the
> benefit of our dancers, but also for the greater community in which all
> of our dancers live.
>
> Mac Sloan
> Thursday Night Dance, Concord Scout House, MA
>
>
>
>
>
> Walker Sloan
> sloan@medevelop.com <mailto:sloan@medevelop.com>
>
> On 23/01/06 11:18 PM, Julian Blechner via Organizers wrote:
> > Question for anyone with the "you will alienate someone" or
> "everyone
> > has a different level of risk" mindset:
> > In other areas of life, do you consider someone's personal
> preference
> > (like not wearing a mask) the same as someone's health needs (like
> > having a health condition, or a family member who does)?
> >
> > Like, how is this "both sides have a preference" narrative any
> different
> > from able-bodied people being like "Oh, well, I just don't like
> > handicapped ramps, I prefer steps"?
> > I'm not asking to be mean or rude. I genuinely would love an
> explanation.
> >
> > I think there actually _is_ a way to please most people, and not
> just
> > disregard people with medical conditions (or family with them).
> > That is - making sure no area's dances are all mask-optional.
> > There's a big difference between an area having _some_ mask-optional
> > dances, sure, but if they're _all_ mask-optional.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Julian Blechner
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 5:56 PM John and/or Jan Bloom via Organizers
> > <organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>
> > <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>>> wrote:
> >
> > As Alan said, whatever you do you will alienate someone.
> >
> > What I did with the Brunswick ECD was to ask all of the dancers
> > - would you dance if masks were required
> > - would you dance if masks were optional
> > and so on.
> >
> > Then I picked the rules that maximized the number of dancers.
> >
> > I realize that this is harder for Contra, where you have a lot of
> > dancers that you can't ask, including potential future dancers.
> > But in my case it seemed like the right way to do it.
> >
> > John Bloom
> > _______________________________________________
> > Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>
> > <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>>
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> > organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>
> > <mailto:organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>
> _______________________________________________
> Organizers mailing list -- organizers@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers@lists.sharedweight.net>
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:organizers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>
>