A post on Facebook, shared hundreds of times, attributes a quote stating “I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots” to Albert Einstein.
There is no evidence that he ever said this. According to Quote Investigator—a site that sources quotes circulating online—the earliest versions of this post appeared online in 2012.
In an article about the same quote, US fact checking service PolitiFact found no record of this quote in a definitive collection of the scientist’s words.
Both PolitiFact and fellow fact checking service Snopes have pointed out that a quote bearing some resemblance to the Facebook post appears in the 1995 film Powder, with a character played by Jeff Goldblum saying: “It’s become appallingly clear that our technology has surpassed our humanity.”
Another character, played by Sean Patrick Flanery, responds “Albert Einstein.”
Posts in which quotes are misattributed to public figures are relatively common on social media, and often reach very large audiences. We have recently checked quotes misattributed to Sir David Attenborough and Boris Johnson.
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
A video shared on Facebook shows what appears to be hundreds of dead birds along the deck of a cruise ship.
A caption next to the video states “Cruise ship turns on 5G , birds this time, what next?”
There’s no evidence the birds were killed by 5G.
The website BirdCast suggests the deaths were a result of migration, and that it is possible that the nocturnally migrating birds were attracted to the lights of the cruise ship and then became disorientated by them, resulting in collisions and death.
Deaths during migration are common as birds may experience bad weather at sea and drown, get lost or collide with man made objects, as this article by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds explains.
We have fact checked similar misleading claims about birds being killed by 5G before.
Reuters Fact Check reported that the video was first posted on a website for cruise ship workers in April 2020.
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
“The Novavax trial participants will have their vaccine pass in the United Kingdom. We are working with other countries to make sure that that is recognised, but as far as the UK is concerned, they will be considered fully vaccinated, whether they have had the placebo or the vaccine.”
Nadhim Zahawi 22 July 2021
In the House of Commons, vaccine minister Nadhim Zahawi was asked about the difficulties that some individuals who have taken part in the Novavax Covid-19 vaccine trials have had in being able to obtain vaccine certificates.
In response, he said that Novavax trial participants will be considered fully vaccinated whether they received the placebo or the active vaccine. This is true, but for those who’ve received the placebo, this will only be the case for the duration of the trial, and for a 16 week grace period afterwards, during which they will need to get an approved vaccine if they haven’t already.
The Novavax Covid-19 vaccine trial is a phase 3 trial of a new Covid-19 vaccine. It was led by researchers at St George’s, University of London and enrolled more than 15,000 adults across the UK.
Mr Zahawi’s answer has been widely shared on social media. Some users have suggested this means the vaccine passports are less valid, that there has been a lack of transparency for those that received placebo, or imply that this decision is evidence that the vaccine roll out is a continuing experiment.
However, the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) confirmed to Full Fact that participants who receive a placebo, or a vaccine that does not become approved, will be treated as vaccinated only for the duration of the trial, and for a 16 week grace period after a trial ends. After this, they will need to obtain an approved vaccine.
Professor Paul Heath, the principal investigator behind the Novavax study, told Full Fact that all participants in the trial will have now been offered an active Covid-19 vaccine (including those who initially received placebo as part of the trial).
Some may also have asked whether they received an active vaccine or placebo (known as being ‘unblinded’), and then gone on to have an approved active vaccine, such as one from Pfizer for example.
DHSC confirmed that many vaccine trial participants will now have received an active vaccine (either due to trial design, or through unblinding). It also said that being in a Covid-19 vaccine trial should not disadvantage people, and all vaccine trial participants should be treated as fully vaccinated.
This would include for the duration of the trial, and for a 16 week grace period after it ends, if the participant received the placebo or a vaccine that does not become approved. After this they would need to obtain an approved vaccine if recommended by the doctor in charge of the trial.
The NHS is working on an update to facilitate this through the app in England, and in the meantime, vaccine trial participants across the UK will receive a letter confirming their participation in a trial and vaccine status.
In June, Deputy Chief Medical Officer Johnathan Van-Tam wrote an open letter to UK residents who have volunteered to take part in Covid-19 vaccine studies.
He said vaccine participants will not be disadvantaged, regardless of “whether you have had a vaccine that is licenced or unlicensed, whether you have had a placebo (dummy) vaccine or not, and if you are taking part in a ‘mix and match’ study”. He said that this applies to recently started, ongoing and future trials, including the Novavax trial.
Professor Van-Tam stated that trial participants will be “covered by any potential UK domestic vaccine certification from the moment you enter a trial until you leave.
“At the end, if you have had a vaccine that is not going to be licenced or a placebo (dummy), you will remain certified during a grace period to allow you to have the NHS standard vaccines if these are recommended by the doctor in charge of the trial.”
He said that this would apply domestically, and was clear that participants “should also not be disadvantaged as global travel resumes” as the DHSC “believe the added risk of allowing the relatively small number of clinical trial participants to travel (in the UK approximately 40,000 people, the vast majority of whom have been vaccinated) is strongly outweighed by the benefit of ensuring that recruitment and retention into clinical trials can continue”.
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
Education Next senior editor Paul Peterson spoke with Robert Behning, chair of the house education committee in Indiana, about recently enacted legislation expanding the Indiana School Choice Scholarship program.
Paul Peterson: How many students are participating in this program, and how much is it expanding under the new legislation?
Robert Behning
Robert Behning: Today about 35,000 students statewide are in the program. We made dramatic changes this year, though. The first voucher bill in Indiana, in 2011, was means tested. For a family to be eligible, their income had to be no higher than [the maximum qualifying income for] free and reduced lunch, which at that time was about $40,000 for a family of four. What we did this year is lift that cap to 300 percent of free and reduced lunch, so a family of four with an income of $145,000 or less will now have access to school-choice scholarships.
Now Democrats in Indiana are complaining that this is too much, that families that make $145,000 a year don’t need the money to send their children to a private school, and that this initiative is just helping the rich at the expense of the poor. How do you respond to that?
That point came up in some of the debates. One of the things I reflected back to them during those debates was that Joe Biden is now president of the United States, and he has said that if you make less than $150,000, you are middle income, and you deserve a stimulus check. And I would argue that if the president—the president of their party, so to speak—argues that that is a middle income for Americans, then what we are doing in Indiana is implementing policy that he has advocated for. I would also argue that for choice to be successful, to have more opportunities for kids across the state, the program cannot be just in urban centers. It can’t be just for kids in poverty and failing schools. You need a robust choice environment to lift up everyone.
Are there new private schools opening up? How many private-school placements are available to students now?
We estimate that we have 12,000 to 15,000 seats available. We’ve made entry into the choice program relatively easy. A choice school can be either brick and mortar or virtual. I think we’re going to see a growth of choice schools in Indiana, now that there are more funds available. I’ve received a lot of letters and emails from individuals who have an interest in expanding and making more options available for kids. We also created an education savings account program for special-ed students.
What’s the charter school situation in Indiana? And why was that not expanded at the same time?
We have no caps on charters, and we have multiple authorizers. [Indiana was the first] state in the union to allow the mayor of a city to authorize, and the mayor of Indianapolis is an authorizer. We have a state charter board, and we’ve allowed both public and nonpublic universities to become authorized to charter. One of the dilemmas in the charter sector has been facility funding, so we have significantly increased that funding as well.
A lot of people say, though, that this all sounds good, but how about the kids being left behind in the public schools? Aren’t you raiding the public schools of their best students? Aren’t there extra resources that these schools need that are now being lost?
As I said earlier, I think that when choice really works, it lifts up everyone. And our data have demonstrated that. Indianapolis probably has the most choice options of all the communities in our state. They have the most charters per capita, and we’ve created other options for them. We have traditional charter schools, or legacy charters, and we’ve created an option called innovation network charters, which are charters that are located within traditional school buildings. [Both the traditional and the charter schools] have embraced competition, and academic performance overall has actually increased. When you get robust competition, you’ll find that it has uplifted everyone’s performance.
How did you get the Republican Party consolidated behind this, given that a lot of Republicans come from rural areas? I grew up in a small town, and I remember that everybody was enthusiastic about their local public school—the basketball team, the football team, the band, the orchestra. Are the rural legislators as enthusiastic about choice?
I would say there probably is a bit less enthusiasm among them, but I also think it takes leadership, and we’ve had some great leaders over the years who have helped paint the picture, or the vision. I don’t think it should be about either-or, but about both. So, you’re not necessarily tearing away at your traditional public schools. It’s about improving everybody’s opportunity.
The other side of that coin is that choice is available in cities more than anywhere else. And the demand is greater among minority families than any other families, in our polling. Why are Democrats so solidly against giving opportunities, especially to low-income students and other students who are attending schools that aren’t performing?
I would argue that that’s probably a reflection of their allegiance to the unions and the union power that has aligned with the Democratic Party.
Betsy DeVos, the U.S. secretary of education under President Trump, was severely criticized during her four years in office. Critics said she was a school-choice advocate and didn’t support the public schools—but maybe she deserves more credit. Do you think she created more interest in school choice by her constant advocacy?
I’ve known Betsy DeVos a long time, and I have a great deal of respect for her. Betsy is willing to put her money behind what she believes in. It’s easy for people to advocate spending other people’s money on a program, but when you put your own money behind it, I think it really shows your level of commitment. I think Betsy was criticized unfairly and that her focus was on uplifting all kids, trying to serve those kids who are most in need, and looking at urban centers where a lot of kids are struggling, failing, and dropping out of school. If school choice helps uplift them, then why not? I think that’s where Betsy was. She was committed to making sure that all students have the opportunity for a great teacher, a great school, and ultimately for success.
So, what do you see as the path forward? What’s the next step in school choice?
I think you’re going to find Covid has changed some of this—that education really needs to be more adaptable and more personalized. Education savings accounts give parents the ability to seek that personalization. Long-term, maybe it makes sense to increase the opportunities afforded by ESAs, because that would give families more options for customizing their children’s education in the future.
This is an edited excerpt from an Education Exchange podcast, which can be heard at educationnext.org.
Sign up for the Education Next Weekly to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
An epidemiologist recommended that people get the COVID-19 vaccine because some evidence suggests an unvaccinated person who gets the delta variant is “twice as likely to require hospital treatment” than someone infected with the alpha variant. But a Facebook video twists that advice to claim that he said vaccinated people would be twice as likely to be hospitalized.
How effective are the vaccines?
How effective are the vaccines?
All of the authorized vaccines are effective at preventing symptomatic disease.
According to the results of the phase 3 trials, the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines had an efficacy of 94% or higher, which means your approximate risk of getting sick is cut by 94% or more if you are vaccinated. It’s important to keep in mind that the effectiveness of the vaccines outside the controlled setting of a clinical trial is typically somewhat lower. A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found these two vaccines were 90% effective in real-world conditions, two weeks after the second dose, and 80% effective two weeks after the first dose. The study monitored 3,950 health care personnel, first responders and other essential workers for 13 weeks.
Johnson & Johnson’s phase 3 trial began in late September, nearly two months after the Pfizer and Moderna trials and shortly before a new variant of the coronavirus emerged in South Africa. Globally, J&J reported an efficacy of 66.1% in preventing moderate to severe COVID-19 and an efficacy of 85.4% in preventing severe or critical COVID-19. But efficacy was higher in the U.S. population (72% efficacy in preventing moderate to severe disease and 85.9% efficacy in preventing severe or critical disease) than in South Africa (64% and 81.7% efficacy in preventing moderate to severe or severe/critical disease, respectively).
Data from the Moderna trial also demonstrate that the vaccine protects against severe COVID-19. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine probably does as well.But because so few participants in that trial developed severe COVID-19, this hasn’t yet been conclusively shown. The J&J trial showed 100% efficacy in preventing COVID-19 that would require medical intervention — meaning hospitalization, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation or a life support machine.
Although the trials show the vaccines protect against symptomatic disease, what isstill unknown is whether these vaccines protect against infection with the coronavirus, and if not, whether they can prevent someone from spreading the virus to others. (Seeour video on the distinction between virus and disease.) However, the CDC has said that “a growing body of evidence” suggests those who are fully vaccinated are “potentially less likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.”
Link to this
Full Story
Studies indicate that currently available vaccines are largely effective against the delta variant of the virus that causes COVID-19. But a video circulating on Facebook wrongly tells viewers the opposite.
The video is part of a series of similar webcasts from Jen DePice, a Philadelphia-area chiropractor who has used Facebook to advocate against the vaccines. Another video in the series, for example, is pinned to the top of her organization’s page with this message: “JUST SAY NO…to the Jab!“
The video we’ll address here has been viewed 48,000 times and has garnered comments such as, “Best news as I’ve not been VAC & have no plans to be.”
In the video, DePice claims that those who are exposed to the delta variant are “twice as likely to require hospitalization if the person was vaccinated.”
There is no support for this statement, and, as we noted, studies have shown the COVID-19 vaccines authorized in the U.S. are largely effective against the delta variant.
Although DePice says that her claim is based on research “from Harvard,” we could find no such study, and she didn’t respond to a message on her Facebook account asking for further details.
However, it appears that she misrepresented an interview with a Harvard University professor.
The post accompanying the video links to an interview Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health posted with William Hanage, an associate professor of epidemiology.
In that July 8 interview, Hanage said (emphasis added), “Delta’s greater virulence means that unvaccinated people who become infected will be sicker and the burden on the health care system will be greater. Evidence suggests, for example, that an unvaccinated person with Delta infection is roughly twice as likely to require hospital treatment than a person infected with the previously dominant variant.”
Hanage’s point is supported by a Scottish study published in June that found the risk of hospitalization was about twice as high for those with the delta variant compared with those with the previously dominant alpha variant, but the finding was preliminary.
As we’ve explained, it’s not yet settled whether the delta variant causes more severe disease than other versions of the virus. Public Health England, for example, posted an assessment on July 23 saying that the delta variant appeared to increase the risk of hospitalization relative to alpha, but that there was a “low” level of confidence about this.
But, as far as DePice’s claim is concerned, it appears that she has misrepresented what Hanage said about what group is at higher risk to be hospitalized.
She also failed to convey what Hanage said about the value of vaccination against COVID-19 generally.
Hanage clearly advised in that interview: “Get vaccinated if you are not already.”
He explained that the high transmissibility of the delta variant means that the virus can spread faster than the rate of vaccination around the world. This variant also appears to produce high viral loads early in infection, he said, “which may mean that it’s even more infectious during the period when people don’t yet realize they’re infected.”
A July study from China that has yet to be peer reviewed found that the viral load for those infected with the delta variant was 1,000 times higher than for those who had the original strain of the virus.
Hanage also noted in the interview that the delta variant appears to be more able to cause “so-called breakthrough infections in vaccinated people.” But, he said, the resulting infections are “comparatively mild.”
In the U.S., the delta variant accounted for 83% of COVID-19 cases for the two weeks ending July 17, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated. And on July 16, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC, said at a press briefing that more than 97% of those who were hospitalized were unvaccinated.
As we said, the vaccines appear to be effective against the delta variant, but several studies have emphasized the importance of getting the full dosage of the vaccine if two shots are required, as is the case for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
Editor’s note:SciCheck’s COVID-19/Vaccination Projectis made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The foundation hasno controlover our editorial decisions, and the views expressed in our articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundation. The goal of the project is to increase exposure to accurate information about COVID-19 and vaccines, while decreasing the impact of misinformation.
Sources
Sakay, Yasemin Nicola. “Here’s How Well COVID-19 Vaccines Work Against the Delta Variant.” Healthline.com. 22 Jul 2021.
Bernal, Jamie Lopez, et al. “Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant.” New England Journal of Medicine. 21 Jul 2021.
Feldscher, Karen. “The danger of the Delta variant.” T.H. Chan School of Public Health. 8 Jul 2021.
Sheikh, Aziz, et al. “SARS-CoV-2 Delta VOC in Scotland: demographics, risk of hospital admission, and vaccine effectiveness.” The Lancet. 14 Jun 2021.
Li, Baisheng, et al. “Viral infection and transmission in a large, well-traced outbreak caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant.” medRxiv. 23 Jul 2021.
Reardon, Sara. “How the Delta variant achieves its ultrafast spread.” Nature. 21 Jul 2021.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID Data Tracker — Variant Proportions. Accessed 26 Jul 2021.
Walensky, Rochelle. “Press Briefing by White House COVID-19 Response Team and Public Health Officials.” Whitehouse.gov. 16 Jul 2021.
The post Video Twists Advice on Delta Variant and Vaccination appeared first on FactCheck.org.
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
President Biden announces new incentives and mandates to encourage people to get their COVID-19 vaccinations, including giving $100 to anyone who gets fully vaccinated, asking DOD how they'll add COVID-19 vaccine to military requirements, requiring f […] Read More
A Facebook post contains lots of false information about tetanus, including misinformation about the types of wounds that can lead to tetanus infection, and the fact that a bleeding wound means there is “NO tetanus”.
What is Tetanus?
Tetanus is an infection caused by a bacteria called Clostridium tetani, and affects the muscles and nervous system. It is rare in the UK, but can be fatal.
The symptoms are caused by toxins produced by the bacteria once it enters the body.
A bleeding wound does not completely eliminate the risk of tetanus
The bacteria that cause tetanus can live in the gut and faeces of horses and other animals.
The bacteria itself is anaerobic (lives in an oxygen-free environment), but it produces spores which allow it to reproduce. These spores can live in lots of different environments including ones with oxygen, like on surfaces and in soil, and can survive for a very long time.
Infection in humans then occurs if spores are introduced into the body, for example through a cut or wound.
The Facebook post claims: “If your wound was not caused by a rusty nail (embedded in a place where cattle, sheep, or horses graze and poop, or where cattle, sheep, or horses used to graze or poop) or a pitch fork while mucking stalls… you most likely don’t have to worry about tetanus.”
This isn’t true. While some types of injuries may pose a higher risk than others, the NHS website describes several different types of injury that could pose a risk of tetanus infection, especially if you are not vaccinated, including eye injury, contaminated injections, piercings, burns and animal bites. Public Health England says tetanus may also follow injecting drug use or abdominal surgery.
The post adds: “Once exposed to oxygen, it dies. Blood carries oxygen, so if the wound is bleeding, it is being oxygenated.”
Although it is true that the bacteria require an environment without oxygen, it is not true that the presence of oxygen eliminates the risk of tetanus infection. A bleeding wound does not completely eliminate the risk of tetanus.
How is it treated?
Vaccines against tetanus are a large part of why we have so few cases in the UK. The vaccine can protect against tetanus infection, and it is included in the standard UK immunisation schedule.
The post claims that if there were concerns about tetanus exposure, the only thing that could help would be an injection of tetanus immunoglobulin. This contains antibodies that stop the tetanus toxin working and offers immediate short term protection.
The NHS website says that if somebody has a very high risk wound (but has not yet developed symptoms), the wound would be cleaned and immunoglobulins may be given. In addition, if somebody has not been fully vaccinated against tetanus, or isn’t sure, they may be given a top up vaccine.
If a tetanus infection is suspected (due to symptoms or laboratory tests), lots of different treatments may be given, including immunoglobulins, and this would normally require admission to hospital and an intensive care setting.
Tetanus immunisation is usually combined with others, for example, polio and diphtheria.
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
Hybrid Homeschooling: A Guide to the Future of Education
by Michael Q. McShane Rowman & Littlefield, 2021, $60; 142 pages.
As reviewed by Michael B. Horn
Hybrid learning and homeschooling have become prominent models over the past school year as millions more students learned from home, whether part or full time, during the coronavirus pandemic.
Against that backdrop, Mike McShane’s new book, Hybrid Homeschooling, would seem both topical and timely.
It is both of those things, but not for reasons directly related to the pandemic or the various phenomena of blended and remote learning that became so widespread in much of the country beginning in March 2020.
McShane’s book is instead a treatment of a strand of homeschooling that has received relatively little attention: “hybrid homeschooling,” which he defines as “a school that for some part of the week educates children in a traditional brick-and-mortar building and for some other part of the week has children educated at home.”
At first glance, this concept might not seem to differ much from the enriched virtual-school models that have emerged over the past 15 years—schools in which students learn in person for a portion of the week and remotely online for another part of the week—or even schools in which students learn in person five days a week and learn at home during off hours. The big difference, McShane writes, lies in the definition of homeschooling, Hybrid homeschoolers have an education that is at least “partially controlled by parents, is partially provided by their parents, and takes place in the home for part of the school week. . . . The arrangement must meet three criteria: physical, regular, and substantial.”
The book serves ultimately as a survey-level primer on this phenomenon, which is an important one to understand because hybrid homeschooling may make homeschooling and school choice more accessible to millions of families in the years ahead. As McShane documents, prior to the pandemic, 10 percent of parents indicated a desire to home-school their children “if money or logistics” were no object. According to a February 2021 survey by EdChoice, where McShane is director of national research, 44 percent of parents would prefer a mix of home- and school-based education in the future—and, assuming hybrid homeschooling is available, parents in the original 10 percent are more likely to find a way to continue to home-school in the years ahead.
McShane leads into his primer with a brief but comprehensive summary of the research and the state of homeschooling more generally. As he documents, homeschooling has been on the rise since 1970, when “there were fewer than fifteen thousand homeschool students throughout the United States.”
Since then, he argues, it’s come “roaring back,” which is hard to dispute given that in 2016, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, 1.69 million students—or 3.3 percent of the schooling population—were home-schooled, up from 850,000 in 1999.
First grader Jaion Pollard arrives at Manchester Academic Charter School in Pittsburgh on the first day of in-person learning on a hybrid schedule, March 29, 2021.
What McShane doesn’t mention is that the NCES estimate peaked at 1.773 million in 2012. Granted, the data are weak on the true numbers of students who are home-schooled, because of the wide variability in state policy relating to the practice—which McShane does a good job of summarizing—yet it seems clear that prior to the pandemic, the growth of homeschooling had plateaued. Although McShane shows evidence based on state-level data that the numbers may have started to rise again into 2019, homeschooling hadn’t been growing nearly as fast as its advocates like to assert.
Then again, what makes hybrid homeschooling so intriguing is its potential to make homeschooling more accessible to families by, for example, reducing costs or eliminating parents’ logistical challenges around childcare.
After reviewing studies on the effects of homeschooling and considering the views of its detractors, McShane concludes that it’s not possible to assert that homeschooling has a positive effect on academic achievement or social development, but it’s also clear that students who are home-schooled “run little risk of academic or social harm.”
The book provides a series of compelling case studies of families and educators who have made the leap into hybrid homeschooling. Each chapter begins with a story that illustrates a particular aspect of homeschooling and chronicles the experiences of parents, families, educators, and regulators. These stories serve to humanize the sometimes wonky details that McShane explores throughout.
There’s the story, for example, of a family whose children are enrolled in the Classical Christian Conservatory of Alexandria, Virginia, where the mother, Kristin Forner, is on the front lines of fighting Covid-19 as an anesthesiologist and palliative-care physician.
Forner told McShane that “we are not a typical homeschooling family,” as both she and her husband were educated in public schools and were not particularly excited about homeschooling at first. But they were drawn to the model because they wanted a classical, Christian education for their children, and there weren’t many schooling options around that fit the bill. When they realized they could afford the conservatory and that their children would learn at home two days a week, the benefits became clearer: quality time with their children, more time for creative play, greater transparency into what their children were learning, and the opportunity to teach controversial subjects on their own terms.
What emerges from the stories is an empathetic portrait of the individuals who choose to engage in hybrid homeschooling—and a realization of how diverse those individuals are.
McShane argues that families choose hybrid homeschooling for four primary reasons: the gift of time, personalization, being involved together in education, and mental health.
As for educators, they choose to participate in hybrid models for many of the same reasons, but also to create a stronger community than they could in a public school. That said, McShane describes the drawbacks to teaching in a hybrid homeschool environment—compensation chief among them—that for now will likely limit the numbers of educators who can commit to such schools.
Michael Q. McShane
One of the most interesting chapters provides a summary of policy on homeschooling. The chapter covers the various ways in which states treat homeschoolers and the challenges, inherent in models that aren’t built around seat time, of circumventing time-based Carnegie Unit requirements. It also highlights the opportunities to innovate that hybrid homeschooling affords public-school leaders when they choose to participate rather than fight those who opt for homeschooling. The public-school educators McShane chronicles come across as cage busters redefining the educational experience in positive ways. Kentucky’s superintendent of the year, Brian Creasman, from Fleming County Schools, for example, seized the opportunity to enroll hybrid homeschoolers in mastery-based programs and at last take advantage of the state regulations that waive the Carnegie Unit—regulations that were “staring at us in the face.”
Where the book most misses the mark is in the innovation chapter, which feels forced and a bit too academic. The discussion of design thinking in hybrid homeschooling isn’t so much wrong as it is stilted and too brief to resonate. And the use of Everett Rogers’s diffusion-of-innovation curve—a model that attempts to show the rate at which new ideas and technologies spread—feels premature at best. As a whole, the chapter reads like a needless add-on to an otherwise robust discussion of the growing hybrid-homeschooling phenomenon.
I would have preferred to see McShane explore how the funders that are looking for ways to reinvent schooling through entrepreneurship and innovation might exploit—or perhaps already are exploiting—hybrid homeschooling to help produce larger-scale changes in the aftermath of the pandemic. For funders looking for ideas, there are plenty of inspiring innovators and entrepreneurs in this book who may hold the keys to a bigger rethinking of how education has to work in this country. McShane’s volume is a great place to start.
Michael Horn is an executive editor of Education Next, co-founder of and a distinguished fellow at the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation, and a senior strategist at Guild Education.
Sign up for the Education Next Weekly to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
By: Michael B. Horn Title: A Robust and Timely Discussion of a New Kind of Homeschooling Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/robust-timely-discussion-new-kind-homeschooling-hybrid-homeschooling-mcshane-book-review/?utm_source=A%2BRobust%2Band%2BTimely%2BDiscussion%2Bof%2Ba%2BNew%2BKind%2Bof%2BHomeschooling&utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=RSS%2BReader Published Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:00:11 +0000
The COVID-19 vaccines currently in use must be administered via injection. But Instagram posts baselessly suggest that Bill Gates and George Soros will use COVID-19 tests to secretly vaccinate people who haven’t yet received the shots. There is no evidence for that conspiracy theory, and scientists say trying to administer a vaccine with a swab would likely not be effective.
What tests are available for COVID-19?
What tests are available for COVID-19?
Tests that detect current infections with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, are known as viral tests. There are two types: a Nucleic Acid Amplification Test, or NAAT, and an antigen test.
Many of the NAATs use a molecular biology technique known as the polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, to detect even a very tiny amount of the virus in a specimen.
The PCR test takes advantage of some natural features of biology to essentially scan through all of the RNA present in a sample — such as a nasal swab — and search for the presence of coronavirus RNA.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says NAATs “are unlikely to return a false-negative result of SARS-CoV-2,” and it recommends only laboratory-based NAATS, the most sensitive tests, to confirm infection. It also says saliva tests aren’t as optimal as those using swabs of the nose or nasopharynx (upper throat behind the nose).
An antigen test is designed to detect the coronavirus antigen, a structure on the surface of the virus that triggers an immune response. Also conducted via a nasal or throat swab, antigen tests are less sensitive than NAATs but inexpensive and can usually produce results in about 15 minutes. Getting a result from a NAAT test can take about an hour or even a few days.
Testing can help stop the spread of the coronavirus from those who test positive, because they can then isolate themselves from others. But, as we’ve explained, testing has its limitations. It can takea few daysor even longer after exposure to the virus before it’s detectable by the diagnostic tests. So even some with negative results could be infectious.
Still, to help limit the spread, the U.S. has instituted travel requirements and recommendations. All international airline passengers, including U.S. citizens and residents, and those who are fully vaccinated, arriving in the U.S. must show “a negative COVID-19 test, taken within three (3) calendar days of departure, or proof of recovery from the virus within the last 90 days,” as the State Department explains.
The CDC also recommends that everyone, including the fully vaccinated, get a viral test three to five days after returning from international travel.
The CDC recommends that those who aren’t fully vaccinated avoid international travel, and if they must travel, to get a test one to three days beforehand. The unvaccinated also should self-quarantine for seven days after returning to the U.S., even if they tested negative before or upon returning.
International destinations may have their own testing requirements as well.
As for domestic travel, the fully vaccinated don’t need to get tested, but the CDC recommends the unvaccinated follow the same guidelines as those for international travel.
Link to this
How do we know what ingredients are in a vaccine?
How do we know what ingredients are in a vaccine?
The full ingredient list for any authorized COVID-19 vaccine can be found on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website and in a variety of documents on the Food and Drug Administration’swebsite, including in a fact sheet for vaccine recipients that’s available in numerous languages.
Both the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines contain messenger RNA, or mRNA; a variety of fatty molecules, or lipids, to protect the mRNA; and a few other ingredients, including salts and sugar, to keep the vaccine stable and at a similar acidity to the human body. The Johnson & Johnson, or Janssen, vaccine contains a harmless adenovirus — a type of virus that typically causes the common cold — modified with the genetic material for SARS-CoV-2, as well as salts as stabilizing and buffering agents.
There are no preservatives, egg or latex in the vaccines.
Link to this
Full Story
A group backed by the philanthropic organizations of Bill Gates and George Soros recently purchased a U.K.-based company that makes diagnostic tests, including rapid tests for COVID-19.
Soros’ Open Society Foundations announced on July 19 that the Soros Economic Development Fund, with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, had launched “Global Access Health” — with plans to bring medical technology to low-income countries.
The announcement said Global Access Health had acquired the testing company Mologic with plans to retool it and “address gaps in the provision of global diagnostics in low-income communities and regions that profit-focused business has failed to address.”
On social media — where Gates and Soros have long been the subject of false claims and conspiracy theories — the news was in some corners billed as being proof of something vaguely nefarious. A TikTok video viewed more than 18,000 times said the development should “absolutely terrify everybody,” and suggested the men were seeking “population control.”
And some Instagram posts baselessly linked the news to a purported plot to give the COVID-19 vaccine to unwitting individuals who have opted to not receive the vaccine.
A post from “@unclesamsmisguidedchildren1,” which received nearly 1,300 likes before it was deleted, posted a screenshot of a news story about the purchase of the testing company.
“don’t want to get VAX , they will just put whatever is in the VAX in the tests,” the post claimed in its caption. “They will make you get tested before a doctors app, before flying, before going to work, before entering a government building etc.”
The same post was also shared on another account, where it has accrued more than 900 likes.
But there is no evidence for the purported plot to surreptitiously give the COVID-19 vaccines through tests — or for the idea that the vaccines can be administered effectively that way.
Representatives for the Gates Foundation and the Soros Economic Development Fund also told us the claim was false.
A spokesperson for the Soros Economic Development Fund said in a statement that the allegation was “clearly nonsense. The diagnostics that determine whether or not someone has COVID-19 are used independently of the vaccine strategy, and simply guide users whether or not to isolate or to seek medical care.”
Testing Done with Swab, Not Injection
In relation to the post’s reference to “whatever is in the VAX,” it’s worth emphasizing that the ingredients in the COVID-19 vaccines that are being used in the U.S. are publicly listed in Food and Drug Administration documents, as readers can see in FDA fact sheets for the Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines.
And all of those vaccines are administered through an injection. Most tests for current COVID-19 infections — including rapid tests — are meanwhile done either with a nasal or throat swab.
Lisa Morici, an associate professor at the Tulane University School of Medicine who studies vaccines, told us that all of the “authorized vaccines are given by needle injection and these rapid tests don’t involve needles.”
Rapid COVID-19 tests use saliva or nasal samples, she noted in an email, and don’t inject anything into bodies.
Karen A. Norris, a professor and researcher at the University of Georgia and its Center for Vaccines and Immunology, likewise told us in an email that “the current vaccines are not formulated to work via nasal delivery.” Nor were they tested to be given orally.
Norris said that there is work underway to develop COVID-19 vaccines for intranasal delivery, as was described in a recent paper in the journal Science — though “[g]enerating immunity via mucosal routes is hard,” she said, which is “why most vaccines on the market are delivered by injection.”
Such an approach isn’t new for vaccines, Norris noted, since there’s already an influenza vaccine that is administered this way.
“Although there is a scientifically plausible reason for administering COVID19 vaccines via the nose, they would be administered using a spray device rather than a swab,” said Troy Randall, a researcher and professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham who co-authored the recent Science article. “A swab would be really inefficient and would almost certainly not work. By analogy, think of applying sunscreen. I could spray it on evenly and protect my skin, but if I applied it by poking my arm with a Q-tip I’ll end up with a sunburn and a tiny white spot.”
Notably, two of the three vaccines authorized for emergency use in the U.S. — from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna — use modified messenger RNA, which instruct cells to create spike proteins that trigger an immune response to protect against COVID-19. And whether mRNA vaccines can be effectively administered through the nose is currently unclear.
“Some of the current shot-in-the-arm vaccines, like ChAdOx1” — the AstraZeneca vaccine — “might be useful as a nasal spray,” Randall said. “However, we have no idea whether any of the mRNA vaccines would work intranasally. Again, even if they worked, they would be administered as a spray and not a swab.”
There is also no oral COVID-19 vaccine in use yet — though some such pills are being tested.
In short, there’s no evidence for the conspiracy theory that Gates and Soros will use COVID-19 tests to secretly vaccinate individuals — or for the idea that an effort to administer any of the current COVID-19 vaccines in such a way would effectively work.
Editor’s note:SciCheck’s COVID-19/Vaccination Projectis made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The foundation hasno controlover our editorial decisions, and the views expressed in our articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundation. The goal of the project is to increase exposure to accurate information about COVID-19 and vaccines, while decreasing the impact of misinformation.
Sources
Hart, Robert. “Oral Covid Vaccine Set To Begin Trials In Israel.” Forbes. 22 Jul 2021.
“Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregiver.” Food and Drug Administration. Revised 8 Jul 2021.
Lund, Frances E. and Troy D. Randall. “Scent of a vaccine.” Science. 23 Jul 2021.
“Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers.” Food and Drug Administration. Revised 24 Jun 2021.
Morici, Lisa. Associate professor, Tulane University School of Medicine. Email to FactCheck.org. 21 Jul 2021.
“New Social Enterprise Seeks to Expand Affordable Global Access to Health Care.” Press release, Open Society Foundations. 19 Jul 2021.
Norris, Karen. Professor, Center for Vaccines and Immunology, University of Georgia. Email to FactCheck.org. 23 Jul 2021.
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
The video is part of a series of similar webcasts from Jen DePice, a Philadelphia-area chiropractor who has used Facebook to advocate against the vaccines. Another video in the series, for example, is pinned to the top of her organization’s page with this message: 
