|
|
|
|
|
|
by newacct583
2160 days ago
|
|
|
> What about the overwhelming body of evidence showing that specifically children rarely if ever infect adults with COVID-19? I don't know what you're citing. There are a few papers out there showing effects like this, there's certainly no "overwhelming" evidence of anything in a pandemic that's barely seven months old, be real. > but learning the truth about spread was quite surprising to me That phrasing freaks me out a bit. What, exactly, are you reading? This is science, that kind of certainty is a design smell. |
|
|
As far as the overwhelming body of evidence, let's start with some weaker but still reasonable evidence:
https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/contentassets/c1b78bffbf...
> In conclusion, closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland orSweden. The negative effects of closing schools must be weighed against the positive indirect effects it might have on the mitigation of the covid-19 pandemic.
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.E...
Title: No evidence of secondary transmission of COVID-19 from children attending school in Ireland, 2020 separator commenting unavailable
> Children are thought to be vectors for transmission of many respiratory diseases including influenza [2]. It was assumed that this would be true for COVID-19 also. To date however, evidence of widespread paediatric transmission has failed to emerge
> Among 1,001 child contacts of these six cases there were no confirmed cases of COVID-19. In the school setting, among 924 child contacts and 101 adult contacts identified, there were no confirmed cases of COVID-19.
> In summary, examination of all Irish paediatric cases of COVID-19 attending school during the pre-symptomatic and symptomatic periods of infection (n = 3) identified no cases of onward transmission to other children or adults within the school and a variety of other settings. These included music lessons (woodwind instruments) and choir practice, both of which are high-risk activities for transmission. Furthermore, no onward transmission from the three identified adult cases to children was identified.
> The only documented transmission that occurred from this cohort was between adults in a working environment outside school. Among 1,025 child and adult contacts of these six cases in the school setting there were no confirmed cases of COVID-19 during the follow-up period. Follow-up period was at least one incubation period (14 days) from last contact with a case.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-2403_article
> Children are underrepresented in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) case numbers (1,2). Severity in most children is limited, and children do not seem to be major drivers of transmission (3,4). However, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infects children of all ages (1,3). Despite the high proportion of mild or asymptomatic infections (5), they should be considered as transmitters unless proven otherwise.
^ Note I included the "they should be considered as transmitters until included otherwise" to ward off accusations of cherry-picking
---
Now, even if children did spread normally, I would still be against school closures, indeed I am against the policy of containment entirely because I view it as an infantile and ineffective policy that just leads to worsened all-cause mortality and likely worsened COVID-19 mortality over the medium-term.
There is one last study that I am having trouble finding which was much stronger/more conclusive than the ones I linked above, but I'm having trouble finding it. Really need to organize these studies better. (I have a master list of studies w/ relevant tidbits but haven't done that for the children studies since it doesn't interest me as much, given we already know that children don't personally die from COVID-19 in any real numbers)