Chat Forum
It is currently Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:33 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 210 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
bimboman wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
bimboman wrote:
You need to be quite dumb to believe Chinese measurements on the virus at all . 2 in 10 million chance of a healthy under 10 dying in Europe.

Riiiight. Oh well, at least the cull is Darwinian.



2 in 10 million. The cull isn’t occurring. The use of hyperbole around the issue of child safety isn’t amusing in the slightest.

I tell you what is happening, state school kids and especially those from poor households are falling further behind their richer and especially independently schooled peers. That everyone just shrugs, uses dodgy data etc to keep school closed is a disgrace for the children being disadvantaged.


Nor is the cherry picking of data to suit your political opinions amusing. For example, excluding any data from China. I'm sure if it suited your arguments you'd include it. How about Germany? There's a study there with similar outcomes.

Can you explain, how you get 2 from 10 million? There haven't been 10 million infected. Or is it a percentage of the whole population, now the pandemic is over?

How people can send their kids into the teeth of a pandemic when the effects on children is unknown escapes me. Sure, few have died. So what is it doing to them? We simply don't know. The fact it *kills* adults should give us pause. By all means, send your kids to school. But I wouldn't, because I don't know the odds yet, and this is a deadly disease.

Hubris isn't a disinfectant.


Last edited by 6.Jones on Tue May 19, 2020 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 11:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9604
Location: Ultracrepidaria
Raggs wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
Can anyone tell me why my children will be so much safer at school if a test and trace system is implemented?
Will northern Irish drive thru churches be safer with t&t?

I think the BBC just read twatter nowadays rather than actually using thought processes or listening to what is said. Just allowing idiots to do their thinking for them.


Test and trace will make everyone safer.



A bit. It will make us “feel” much safer .


No. It will make everyone a lot safer. If you don't trace the illness, you can't stay on top of the infections and just end up in trouble again.


It's much more important that people stay at home if they're ill. Testing when schools open is more important than tracing. If there is an outbreak in a school, everyone will be aware.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 18453
message #2527204 wrote:
It's much more important that people stay at home if they're ill. Testing when schools open is more important than tracing. If there is an outbreak in a school, everyone will be aware.


I'm sorry, does test and trace stop people from staying at home if they're ill? This can spread asymptomatically. Everyone is asymptomatic for at least some period of time. Even if they stay home as soon as they develop symptoms, they could have been passing it on. That is where the tracing part becomes so hugely important.

If there's an outbreak at school, sure, but would the guy you were near in the supermarket know? Because if not, he might go home, pass it on, and two more schools are facing infections from asymptomatic carriers before you know it. Tracing can stop that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9604
Location: Ultracrepidaria
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
It's much more important that people stay at home if they're ill. Testing when schools open is more important than tracing. If there is an outbreak in a school, everyone will be aware.


I'm sorry, does test and trace stop people from staying at home if they're ill? This can spread asymptomatically. Everyone is asymptomatic for at least some period of time. Even if they stay home as soon as they develop symptoms, they could have been passing it on. That is where the tracing part becomes so hugely important.

If there's an outbreak at school, sure, but would the guy you were near in the supermarket know? Because if not, he might go home, pass it on, and two more schools are facing infections from asymptomatic carriers before you know it. Tracing can stop that.


Well you're not going to test someone if they're asymptomatic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 18453
message #2527204 wrote:
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
It's much more important that people stay at home if they're ill. Testing when schools open is more important than tracing. If there is an outbreak in a school, everyone will be aware.


I'm sorry, does test and trace stop people from staying at home if they're ill? This can spread asymptomatically. Everyone is asymptomatic for at least some period of time. Even if they stay home as soon as they develop symptoms, they could have been passing it on. That is where the tracing part becomes so hugely important.

If there's an outbreak at school, sure, but would the guy you were near in the supermarket know? Because if not, he might go home, pass it on, and two more schools are facing infections from asymptomatic carriers before you know it. Tracing can stop that.


Well you're not going to test someone if they're asymptomatic.


You are if you've traced them as a contact. That's the point. You test everyone that you've traced to someone who tested positive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 1:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 63001
6.Jones wrote:
bimboman wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
bimboman wrote:
You need to be quite dumb to believe Chinese measurements on the virus at all . 2 in 10 million chance of a healthy under 10 dying in Europe.

Riiiight. Oh well, at least the cull is Darwinian.



2 in 10 million. The cull isn’t occurring. The use of hyperbole around the issue of child safety isn’t amusing in the slightest.

I tell you what is happening, state school kids and especially those from poor households are falling further behind their richer and especially independently schooled peers. That everyone just shrugs, uses dodgy data etc to keep school closed is a disgrace for the children being disadvantaged.


Nor is the cherry picking of data to suit your political opinions amusing. For example, excluding any data from China. I'm sure if it suited your arguments you'd include it. How about Germany? There's a study there with similar outcomes.

Can you explain, how you get 2 from 10 million? There haven't been 10 million infected. Or is it a percentage of the whole population, now the pandemic is over?

How people can send their kids into the teeth of a pandemic when the effects on children is unknown escapes me. Sure, few have died. So what is it doing to them? We simply don't know. The fact it *kills* adults should give us pause. By all means, send your kids to school. But I wouldn't, because I don't know the odds yet, and this is a deadly disease.

Hubris isn't a disinfectant.



How many children without preconditions has it killed?


“Cull”.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 2:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56120
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
It's much more important that people stay at home if they're ill. Testing when schools open is more important than tracing. If there is an outbreak in a school, everyone will be aware.


I'm sorry, does test and trace stop people from staying at home if they're ill? This can spread asymptomatically. Everyone is asymptomatic for at least some period of time. Even if they stay home as soon as they develop symptoms, they could have been passing it on. That is where the tracing part becomes so hugely important.

If there's an outbreak at school, sure, but would the guy you were near in the supermarket know? Because if not, he might go home, pass it on, and two more schools are facing infections from asymptomatic carriers before you know it. Tracing can stop that.


Well you're not going to test someone if they're asymptomatic.


You are if you've traced them as a contact. That's the point. You test everyone that you've traced to someone who tested positive.


Our system has moved to testing all close contacts on day one and day seven. Hopefully we'll all have the capacity to do that for the foreseeable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9604
Location: Ultracrepidaria
CM11 wrote:
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
Raggs wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
It's much more important that people stay at home if they're ill. Testing when schools open is more important than tracing. If there is an outbreak in a school, everyone will be aware.


I'm sorry, does test and trace stop people from staying at home if they're ill? This can spread asymptomatically. Everyone is asymptomatic for at least some period of time. Even if they stay home as soon as they develop symptoms, they could have been passing it on. That is where the tracing part becomes so hugely important.

If there's an outbreak at school, sure, but would the guy you were near in the supermarket know? Because if not, he might go home, pass it on, and two more schools are facing infections from asymptomatic carriers before you know it. Tracing can stop that.


Well you're not going to test someone if they're asymptomatic.


You are if you've traced them as a contact. That's the point. You test everyone that you've traced to someone who tested positive.


Our system has moved to testing all close contacts on day one and day seven. Hopefully we'll all have the capacity to do that for the foreseeable.


What do you do between days 1 and 7?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56120
message #2527204 wrote:
What do you do between days 1 and 7?


Can't remember advice for close contacts right now. I think it's to restrict movements. I imagine most would at least wait until the first result is back before going out, whatever about the second but either way it'd be restrict movements for 14 days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 5:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22877
Not good news coming from france

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/corona ... ssion=true


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 6:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21217
happyhooker wrote:


Dr Narula has a decent set o milfy Bj lips there :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 63001
happyhooker wrote:



Quote:
Given that the incubation period for the virus is several days, people are "likely" to have been infected before the reopening of the schools, he said.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 7:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5585
Location: 'ertfordshire
My 5 year old granddaughter due in to school for a “trial” day on Thursday
Parents appear less concerned than her grandparents!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22877
bimboman wrote:
happyhooker wrote:



Quote:
Given that the incubation period for the virus is several days, people are "likely" to have been infected before the reopening of the schools, he said.


indeed. does that make it good news?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 7:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 63001
happyhooker wrote:
bimboman wrote:
happyhooker wrote:



Quote:
Given that the incubation period for the virus is several days, people are "likely" to have been infected before the reopening of the schools, he said.


indeed. does that make it good news?



It makes it unrelated to the school opening. We’re going to have to learn to live with covid .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 7:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15079
I don't really mind either way, but at the moment my 5 yr old in reception would go back, not learn anything, and be in group of 10 kids maybe with her friends maybe not, maybe with her teacher maybe somebody she's never met. Meanwhile my 9 year old stays at home.

Sounds like a waste of time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 18453
happyhooker wrote:


It'll be interesting. They'll know who they came into contact with, and be able to do some tracing to see if they infected anyone else at school.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 8:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9604
Location: Ultracrepidaria
CM11 wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
What do you do between days 1 and 7?


Can't remember advice for close contacts right now. I think it's to restrict movements. I imagine most would at least wait until the first result is back before going out, whatever about the second but either way it'd be restrict movements for 14 days.

You get a test at 14 days too?

I can't see anyone taking any notice if an app told them to take a fortnight off work...especially if they'd only get ssp.

Maybe the first time? But potentially you could be almost never at work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 8:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 3:50 pm
Posts: 1154
RodneyRegis wrote:
I don't really mind either way, but at the moment my 5 yr old in reception would go back, not learn anything, and be in group of 10 kids maybe with her friends maybe not, maybe with her teacher maybe somebody she's never met. Meanwhile my 9 year old stays at home.

Sounds like a waste of time.


This. Utter waste of time. They will not even have the socialising side obviously. Standing inside a hoop in the playground apparently ffs. Ridiculous state of affairs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 8:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24551
shaggy wrote:
Homer wrote:
Personal view and justification:

I would have no issue with sending my son back to school. Obviously his risk of catching the disease will be higher than it would be at home. However, 90% of Covid-19 deaths are aged over 65 and of those younger than 65 most had some form of co-morbidity.

Also, for similar reasons I don't think the risk to a healthy teacher is high either.


Which could be interpreted as no problem as long as somebody else gets really ill/dies from it.



I read only 260 people under 60 without co morbidity have died from this disease!! Its really an infinitesimal risk to kids.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 8:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56120
message #2527204 wrote:
CM11 wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
What do you do between days 1 and 7?


Can't remember advice for close contacts right now. I think it's to restrict movements. I imagine most would at least wait until the first result is back before going out, whatever about the second but either way it'd be restrict movements for 14 days.

You get a test at 14 days too?

I can't see anyone taking any notice if an app told them to take a fortnight off work...especially if they'd only get ssp.

Maybe the first time? But potentially you could be almost never at work.


I just tried to figure this out and it's not clear whether you can go to work or not. You're meant to avoid social situations and stay at home as much as possible but it doesn't explicitly say not to go to work. Common sense would suggest you do. We're not talking about someone you passed on the street here though. In general it'll be someone you live with or spend a lot of time (most likely at work) and that's what needs to happen everywhere to stop it spreading again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 8:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56120
Openside wrote:
shaggy wrote:
Homer wrote:
Personal view and justification:

I would have no issue with sending my son back to school. Obviously his risk of catching the disease will be higher than it would be at home. However, 90% of Covid-19 deaths are aged over 65 and of those younger than 65 most had some form of co-morbidity.

Also, for similar reasons I don't think the risk to a healthy teacher is high either.


Which could be interpreted as no problem as long as somebody else gets really ill/dies from it.



I read only 260 people under 60 without co morbidity have died from this disease!! Its really an infinitesimal risk to kids.


Are two of the morbidities asthma and diabetes?

Apparently a recent study showed that even in elderly patients it was cutting about 10 years off their lives.

But yes, the risk to children is small although the growing evidence about it triggering other serious symptoms is concerning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 9:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21217
Whenever the school says for my kids to go back, I’m adding a few weeks onto that just to be sure. Council can do one if they think I’m takeing even a tiny chance with my own kids, i want to be sure there are no blips or increase in infection rates.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 10:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 63001
Quote:
Apparently a recent study showed that even in elderly patients it was cutting about 10 years off their lives.


What do the less recent studies show.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 10:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 63001
backrow wrote:
Whenever the school says for my kids to go back, I’m adding a few weeks onto that just to be sure. Council can do one if they think I’m takeing even a tiny chance with my own kids, i want to be sure there are no blips or increase in infection rates.



What about the second wave, best keep em off for ever.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2020 11:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:55 pm
Posts: 486
mad that some people still think there is any meaningful risk for children. the commute to school would be more dangerous for most.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 9:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7843
Location: London
No firm opinion on this given I'm not at teacher and I don't have kids. However there surely comes a point where keeping kids cooped up at home, separated from their friends and being told to be scared of the world outside their home will cause more damage than keeping them at home prevents.

No idea whether that point is June or not, but you can't keep kids off school until there is a vaccine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 9:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 56120
croyals wrote:
No firm opinion on this given I'm not at teacher and I don't have kids. However there surely comes a point where keeping kids cooped up at home, separated from their friends and being told to be scared of the world outside their home will cause more damage than keeping them at home prevents.

No idea whether that point is June or not, but you can't keep kids off school until there is a vaccine.


Think I've said this before but it's more all the moving adult pieces that start bouncing off each other rather than the kids themselves that's the issue, IMO. Schools being closed by default is a soft lockdown as it gets more people either off work or working from home.

Of course the kids themselves could be the vectors they were originally assumed to be, that hasn't been completely disproven, and if they are then that exacerbates the situation. I don't think it's a simplistic call at this stage, will hopefully be a lot easier in Sept.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 12:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21217
croyals wrote:
No firm opinion on this given I'm not at teacher and I don't have kids. However there surely comes a point where keeping kids cooped up at home, separated from their friends and being told to be scared of the world outside their home will cause more damage than keeping them at home prevents.

No idea whether that point is June or not, but you can't keep kids off school until there is a vaccine.


Not many kids a really cooped up though, gardens, parks , exercise etc
As long as they don’t touch, kids can see one another already. I reckon it’s the parents and teachers who are more fed up than the kids.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 803
I am seeing lots of groups of kids out on bikes, etc. going to parks and shops together, hanging out in improvised camps in wooded areas. Personal distancing has already been lost in teenagers so it is inevitable that transference will take place in kids outside of school. They are probably safer in school at that age as contact is controlled.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10591
backrow wrote:
Whenever the school says for my kids to go back, I’m adding a few weeks onto that just to be sure. Council can do one if they think I’m takeing even a tiny chance with my own kids, i want to be sure there are no blips or increase in infection rates.


Based on what exactly? Have your kids got pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable?

This sort of stuff is why so many kids are driven to school because of the potential pedo hiding around every corner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21217
Lorthern Nights wrote:
backrow wrote:
Whenever the school says for my kids to go back, I’m adding a few weeks onto that just to be sure. Council can do one if they think I’m takeing even a tiny chance with my own kids, i want to be sure there are no blips or increase in infection rates.


Based on what exactly? Have your kids got pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable?

This sort of stuff is why so many kids are driven to school because of the potential pedo hiding around every corner.


Yeah , middle one has epi pen and allergies , for a couple of extra weeks at home I’m happy with that caution . She’s 7 so I’m sure will be able to cope somehow. Sisters love being together and with logistics have one here and two there just isn’t viable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
Lorthern Nights wrote:
backrow wrote:
Whenever the school says for my kids to go back, I’m adding a few weeks onto that just to be sure. Council can do one if they think I’m takeing even a tiny chance with my own kids, i want to be sure there are no blips or increase in infection rates.


Based on what exactly? Have your kids got pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable?

This sort of stuff is why so many kids are driven to school because of the potential pedo hiding around every corner.


It's a bit different to that. The latest numbers from every empirical study [regardless of what Bimbo say] show children get the disease at about the same rate as adults. This is a new disease, and we don't have enough data yet [or time] to determine the long term effects on anyone, and that includes children. We don't know where in the body of children the disease makes a home, because we haven't had enough dead children to cut up and find out.

It's absolutely right that the mortality rate is low, but that's not the only thing to consider. If you look at the Chinese data, about 5% of children experience severe or critical symptoms. We have no idea what the long term effects of those are. It could be lifelong illness. It might be death, months or years later, like the polio virus or HIV. The only data we do have is the child mortality rate, one data point, six months in. That may bear no resemblance to the child mortality rate, one year in.

This is a global pandemic, and a serious illness. We all have to continue to be extremely careful, or it could be raging twice [or ten times] as badly in a year. There's this bizarre confidence that we've beaten it. We haven't. We've beaten it back, by social distancing. It has no resemblance to unfounded fears of child predators.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
There's been a lot of talk here about risk, and statistics. People have been treating child infection as a risk with high severity but low likelihood. That's a simple equation. You multiply the likelihood by the severity to get a risk factor. Then you multiply the value of what you are risking by the risk factor and compare that to the benefit gained, to try to determine if a given action should be taken. Simple, high school arithmetic.

In this case we don't know the likelihood but even if we did, the value of a child's life is incalculable. You'd have to be getting something of immense value to be putting it at even low risk. If that something is the ability to work to get food on the table - literally survival - then you have a tough choice to make. I'd go to work, because the alternative is everyone starves. But if the reward is extra hours in the day then you should be keeping your children at home. Families with two adults should be keeping their children at home. One of those parents should stop working and look after the children, because this is that serious.

There's a principle in betting theory that you don't make existential bets. You don't go all in, unless you have a lock and there's no bet. How important are your children's lives? Are they existential in your world? Are they something you can't afford to lose? If so, keep them home for now. Keep them home until we have more information about the effects on them of the disease.

Arguments about children missing schooling are spurious. Home learning especially with modern electronic tools works plenty well to give children the information they need. Kids in the country in Australia have been learning that way for generations. Missing out on socialisation is a real thing, but we're in a pandemic. Everyone is suffering from missing out on socialisation. It's not worth risking lives for.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am
Posts: 18453
6.Jones Didn't see a response to these.

Raggs wrote:
All the papers I'm seeing have children are far less likely to die from it. And less likely to spread it.

Studies seem to find that it's getting to them from adults, not from them to others.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... ocument/p1

15 schools, 18 covid cases, 9 pupils, 9 staff, 863 close contacts, and only 2 infected pupils (suspected to be from the school).

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 1.full.pdf

From Vo, none of the children involved got the virus, despite at least 13 living in households where adults had it.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv ... 6.full.pdf

Analysis of other studies, showing that it's very unlikely that children play a substantial role in the spread of the illness.

I haven't been able to find the Swiss studies, but considering they're allowing under 10s to hug grandparents etc, they must be quite confident in the results too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 5:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 63001
6.Jones wrote:
Lorthern Nights wrote:
backrow wrote:
Whenever the school says for my kids to go back, I’m adding a few weeks onto that just to be sure. Council can do one if they think I’m takeing even a tiny chance with my own kids, i want to be sure there are no blips or increase in infection rates.


Based on what exactly? Have your kids got pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable?

This sort of stuff is why so many kids are driven to school because of the potential pedo hiding around every corner.


It's a bit different to that. The latest numbers from every empirical study [regardless of what Bimbo say] show children get the disease at about the same rate as adults. This is a new disease, and we don't have enough data yet [or time] to determine the long term effects on anyone, and that includes children. We don't know where in the body of children the disease makes a home, because we haven't had enough dead children to cut up and find out.

It's absolutely right that the mortality rate is low, but that's not the only thing to consider. If you look at the Chinese data, about 5% of children experience severe or critical symptoms. We have no idea what the long term effects of those are. It could be lifelong illness. It might be death, months or years later, like the polio virus or HIV. The only data we do have is the child mortality rate, one data point, six months in. That may bear no resemblance to the child mortality rate, one year in.

This is a global pandemic, and a serious illness. We all have to continue to be extremely careful, or it could be raging twice [or ten times] as badly in a year. There's this bizarre confidence that we've beaten it. We haven't. We've beaten it back, by social distancing. It has no resemblance to unfounded fears of child predators.



Children without other illnesses are at almost no risk of death.

Groucho, you might want to do a bit of research into the health of those born before and after 1968 HK flu before “protecting” children from the current virus, you may be doing more harm than good. (I’ll spoil the finish, children born after or around the pandemic show much more flu resistance than those whom were older or born 10-15 past the infection high point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 5:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1593
Location: London
Groucho
Quote:
Keep them home until we have more information about the effects on them of the disease.


The problem is that that may in fact be never. I certainly don't see us having any more information any time this year. In the meantime, the child being at home means that at least one adult has to be at home.
In my opinion, certainly in the state system in the UK, the quality of education the kids are getting at home is vastly inferior to what they would be getting at school, along with all the important social interaction learnings that are going on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 5:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21217
not_english wrote:
Groucho
Quote:
Keep them home until we have more information about the effects on them of the disease.


The problem is that that may in fact be never. I certainly don't see us having any more information any time this year. In the meantime, the child being at home means that at least one adult has to be at home.
In my opinion, certainly in the state system in the UK, the quality of education the kids are getting at home is vastly inferior to what they would be getting at school, along with all the important social interaction learnings that are going on.

Agree on the social stuff, but in fact in some ways they are getting superior education in some schools which have made the effort, like my kids ones:
More individual lessons
More one to me time with teachers
Maths English topic and no wanky stuff like what Ramadan is or who can make a sunflower out of bottle tops
Lots of kids learning for themselves on their school provided google sponsored chrome books
Less distraction from the SEN’s kicking off
Strict parents teaching them as well, even if the parent would much rather prefer playing PlayStation all day , possibly first person shooters or fifa


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 8:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9604
Location: Ultracrepidaria
The probability of your child dying of covid is negligible, though it's understandable to want to remove that very small risk if you imagine you can.
I look at it like not letting my kids climb trees. Not allowing them to swim. Not allowing them to go and explore together. Not allowing them to play sport. That sort of thing. And the vast majority of child mortality is due to accidental injury after all.
I understand those that wouldn't send their kids back to school...Maybe I'm a bad parent?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
message #2527204 wrote:
The probability of your child dying of covid is negligible

That's what we don't know. If we divide the number of children by the number of children dead, sure - it appears so. But these are the first days of the pandemic. It's like calculating the odds at the first post of a horse race, and concluding the leader can't lose because it's increased its lead at every meter so far, and betting your child's life on it. Why would you do that? What huge payday do you enjoy if you're right?

I'm not suggesting people wait forever. Just till we have evidence of what the disease does to children. They carry the virus as much as adults do. In order for that to happen, the virus is invading cells and replicating. Where in their bodies does it live, if not in the respiratory tract? What effect does it have on cells there?

I'm not saying anyone's a bad parent. I'm talking fervently about how odds based on emergent mortality aren't what they seem. Some viruses have their worst effects months or years after infection. It depends on where in the body they live, and what they do there.

The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. You can't base odds on no information.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 210 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BlueThunder, Google Adsense [Bot], Sinkers, UncleFB, Yourmother and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group