Thread by @Prof_Katz

A little metaphor on the change from 6 feet of distance to 3 feet of distance..because the devil is always in the details that are rarely discussed. In the case of COVID mitigation that is everything besides distance that should be in place to make 3 feet possible. 1.

2. So imagine a car that has a great safety rating. Sure, you CAN be injured or killed in it, but under most scenarios you are okay in it to certain speeds according to rigorous testing and thoughtful engineering.

3. That engineering includes a strengthened passenger cabin, front and side curtain airbags, crumple zones. Put together, these mean you can get into an accident at relatively high speed and survive with minor or no injuries.

4. But take away ANY ONE of those engineered safety features and the speed at which you can safely get into an accident goes down. It has to. The system - and the rating - is dependent on ALL of the features being in place.

5. If you look at THAT car and then look at your car which lacks the reinforced cabin, or the airbags, or so on, and conclude “I can get into an accident at the same speed and be fine” you are dumb. Perhaps you will get lucky, but not because you made a smart conclusion.

6. Similarly, it is not enough to see that the CDC says 3 feet can be safe. You have to look at the classroom conditions on a HYPERLOCAL level and figure out if you CAN meet the guidance.

That is vastly different than saying “Yippee!“ and packing in twice as many kids.

7. Out of our 98K public schools are there many where they can apply this guidance and safely increase density? Of course there are.

But there are also a very large number where this will simply not be possible because of the other conditions impacting decision making.

8. Nuance matters. The total picture matters. Whether you are desperate for school buildings to open up more or you are more hesitant, it matters that we all work on the assumption that local conditions dictate how much of GUIDANCE can be met.