The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Do Children Ever Transmit the Virus?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Susceptibility varies greatly by age, but what about transmissibility? From The Age of Australia:

Experts fail to find a single case of children passing virus to adults

By Hayley Dixon
April 30, 2020 — 7.57am

London: No child has been found to have passed coronavirus to an adult, a review of the evidence in partnership with the Royal College of Paediatrics has found.

Major studies into the impact of COVID-19 on young children suggest they “do not play a significant role” in spreading the virus and are less likely to become infected than adults.

While experts insist that more evidence is needed, they note there has not been a single case of a child under 10 transmitting the virus, even in contact tracing carried out by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Public health officials in Switzerland have announced that under-10s can hug their grandparents again because they pose them no risk.

Now a review in partnership with the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) has found the evidence “consistently demonstrates reduced infection and infectivity of children in the transmission chain”.

Led by Dr Alasdair Munro, a clinical research fellow in paediatric infectious diseases, the research concluded: “COVID-19 appears to affect children less often, and with less severity, including frequent asymptomatic or subclinical infection. There is evidence of critical illness, but it is rare.

“The role of children in transmission is unclear, but it seems likely they do not play a significant role.”

The review by the Don’t Forget the Bubbles paediatric research project added: “Notably, the China/WHO joint commission could not recall episodes during contact tracing where transmission occurred from a child to an adult.”

Among the evidence is a study of a nine-year-old British boy who contracted coronavirus in the French Alps but did not pass it on, despite having contact with more than 170 people at three schools.

And he was a skier — you know what they are like.

While he said that it was possible children could infect others, there had not been a case to date and there was “no evidence that closing schools is an effective measure”. Further evidence from China showed when families had contracted the virus, children were “unlikely to be the index case”.

What about 18 to 30 year olds?

 
Hide 58 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. What a bizzare disease.

    Aren’t kids THE vector for spreading around usually mild sickness like the flu and colds?

    • Replies: @Alice
    @Kaz

    Do we know that? or do we just assume that because kids have poor hygiene?

    influenza is NOT mild! that falsehood is feeding the fear here because most people no longer remember getting influenza.

    you get sick. you go to the doc. you get well. post hoc prompter hoc fallacy that the doc cured you, right? because most of the time you get better anyway.

    kid gets sick. you get sick. same fallacy. maybe you just came into contact with the same source your kid did.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

  2. moshe says:

    Yes!

    I literally just logged in here to ask the question that you are dealing with here.

    Guidelines are good. They are imperfect but, alas, it is a fallen world and everyone is damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Guidelines however are supposed to advise us regarding our best chances.

    It is now clear to everyone that coronavirus only kills people who are about to die anyway. Perhaps however it does shoeten their lifespan by up to 3 years.

    Perhaps.

    But assuming it does, it’s A Good Thing to stay away from people with serious medical conditions when you are sick. If we get a law mandating that people with any sort of communicable illness stay home or risk getting a ticket I’m cool with that.

    Is that the sum total of what we need?

    Can EVERYONE go and do as they please and simply stay away from grandpa if ill, like we’ve always been doing?

    We’ve been told that “if you mingle while well you are (unwittingly spreading the disease and) murdering people”.

    Pretty much in those words.

    Is there any evidence for that?

    Half of the deaths attributed to coronavirus are of people in nursing homes. Most of whom it now appears died due to neglect and bad treatment that was brought on by The Panic (as mentioned in an earlier comment I have some knowledge about nursing home residents and their needs).

    I am coming around to believe that social distancing is not just bad but deadly and that it has caused more deaths than the virus has.

    I’m not in the right country to do so but if I were, I would very seriously consider visiting my elderly grandfather. I am fairly confident that if this virus is pernicious at all, it is not perniciously communicable from people who aren’t themselves sick.

    As much as most rich and bored people wished it were so, this is not The Plague and avoiding it does more damage than ignoring it.

    This is a First World Problem, aka NOT a problem.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Dissident
    @moshe


    It is now clear to everyone that coronavirus only kills people who are about to die anyway.
     
    Mostly or even overwhelmingly =/= only. Would you deny that there have been casualties that do not fit your exaggerated characterization?

    Denialists like you are the inverse of the hysterics/full-lockdown types at the other extreme. As with Jews can do no right vs. Jews can do no wrong, and any number of other false dichotomies, reality, reason, justice and decency are found at various points along the vast expanse that lies between the cartoon fringes.

  3. There was a group of 211 students from the University of Texas at Austin who travelled to Cabo San Lucas (Mexico) for spring break. 49 of them later tested positive for Covid-19. I assume the students were all firmly under 30; and I assume they weren’t partying with 70 year olds. Based on the media portrayal of spring breakers, I assume that none of them were overweight and they were all in excellent health.

    • Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    @Andrew M

    How many of them were hospitalized ? Probably none of them were hospitalized, we know none of them died from CV , they are much more likely to die from drugs. Did any of the 21 college students spread the disease to their parents ?

  4. Doesn’t matter. It’s the teachers we’re worried about now. Kids can’t go back to school because the teachers will spread it to all the old people.

    We’re screwed.

    I can’t believe any of this.

  5. My eyes were acting strange tonight. They felt like worms were crawling inside them. I rubbed the heck out fof them even though we’re not supposed to touch our eyes. But they were killing me.

    Now thyreyre all red swollen and painful.. I just realized that if I woke up sightless I’d have no way of getting help. Impossible to navigate touch screen menus without sight.

    This is why you live longer with a spouse. Someone to summon help as well as look out for you if you end up in the hospital.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Meretricious

    Talk to your doctor.

    "conjunctivitis and severe eye pain have also been reported"
    https://www.aao.org/headline/alert-important-coronavirus-context

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Meretricious

    Mere, sorry sent my reply to utu and not you. If you live alone and have health issues subscribe to a help line service like "Life Alert."

  6. Would explain why this virus peaks early, just doesn’t get transmitted the ways others do and herd immunity is already there to a significant extent.

    • Replies: @utu
    @LondonBob

    "...herd immunity is already there to a significant extent." - For herd immunity you need at least 50% infected in California. Kaiser Permanente estimated R0 to be slightly over 2 for the pre-countermesures conditions in Southern California. For NYC or London Ro must be higher.

    , @leterip
    @LondonBob

    I wondered the same thing.

    The typical required herd immunity number thrown around is 60% for covid. But if children can not be vectors, then the required herd immunity % would be lower - say 55%.

    And if older children are not vectors, it could be lower still. Say 45-50%.

    And if some mild suppression was kept in place, say hand washing and no large gatherings, the required herd immunity % could be even lower still.

    Replies: @LondonBob

  7. Perhaps this is the question that should have been asked before governor’s started remanding children to their homes indefinitely.

    Let’s exacerbate the already significant problem of kids being addicted to media tablets and adopting a sedentary lifestyle, by removing all of the alternative activities.

    • Replies: @Alice
    @Mike Tre

    Yup, they're killing our kids.

    and let me say I Told You So. Some of us DID ask this BEFORE they closed schools, back when the CDC was saying keep them open and states weren't listening. Because how come schoolteachers weren't already in hospital?

    We were told we were death loving murderous Typhoid Marys for saying it aloud.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    , @Dissident
    @Mike Tre

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16545852701

    Of course, we can't begin to know the whole story but your comment reminded me of that.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/driver-burgess/16157509767
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/theopendoor/48645174217/
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/willeminarose/16729882425/
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/15241284078/

  8. If children cannot spread to adults, then they are irrelevant to herd immunity.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Dr doomNgloom

    It's not that they are irrelevant, it just means that they can already in effect be put in the "immune" column. So if children are 20% of the population then we are already a good way toward herd immunity on day 1.

    Replies: @utu, @Dr. DoomNGloom

  9. anon[419] • Disclaimer says:

    What does this do to herd immunity? There is the obvious 10%+ bump in infected rate, since if you are unable to spread it or get seriously ill from it, you are as good as immune.

    Swine flu in 2009 trended toward infecting and killing the young, with older adults largely immune, so these things have their age biases.

  10. @LondonBob
    Would explain why this virus peaks early, just doesn't get transmitted the ways others do and herd immunity is already there to a significant extent.

    Replies: @utu, @leterip

    “…herd immunity is already there to a significant extent.” – For herd immunity you need at least 50% infected in California. Kaiser Permanente estimated R0 to be slightly over 2 for the pre-countermesures conditions in Southern California. For NYC or London Ro must be higher.

  11. @Meretricious
    My eyes were acting strange tonight. They felt like worms were crawling inside them. I rubbed the heck out fof them even though we're not supposed to touch our eyes. But they were killing me.

    Now thyreyre all red swollen and painful.. I just realized that if I woke up sightless I'd have no way of getting help. Impossible to navigate touch screen menus without sight.

    This is why you live longer with a spouse. Someone to summon help as well as look out for you if you end up in the hospital.

    Replies: @utu, @Buffalo Joe

    Talk to your doctor.

    “conjunctivitis and severe eye pain have also been reported”
    https://www.aao.org/headline/alert-important-coronavirus-context

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @utu

    utu, if you have health issues and live alone subscribe to a help line like "Life Alert"

    Replies: @Jack D

  12. Then send the little rascals back to school. Let the teachers wear masks and everyone wash their hands a lot.

  13. A few weeks ago the big breakthrough story was that asymptomatics play a major role in transmitting the disease. That was the major factor that pushed authorities to recommend the use of masks.

    Now comes this. Children play no major role. And after they say that, they add: they are frequently asymptomatic, as if that had something to do with the fact that they do not transmit the virus.

    But asymptomatic adults play a “major” role in transmitting it, right? So why the association between the two facts when talking about children?

    Cough is one of the reported early symptoms, both in children and in adults. Why is children’s cough more harmless than adults’ cough? I can’t think of a reason why.

    There is a lachrymose (but with a happy ending) story that’s been circulating about a 4-year-old who caught this virus and got terribly sick, and his exams were atypical (why?), and his dad showed only mild symptoms *a few days after the child got sick*. Was this a case where the dad transmitted the disease to his son while asymptomatic and then got sick himself? How likely is that? The story does not say whether the mother got sick (why?).

    https://www.time24.news/t24/2020/04/coronavirus-it-was-torture-to-watch-your-fight-doctor-reports-anguish-of-seeing-her-4-year-old-son-with-covid-19.html

    Also, this family was in near total isolation, so they have no idea how they caught it. In Brazil, they are increasingly reporting cases like that in the nonscientific media. I can’t think of an explanation to how children’s cough, which is certain to contain a fair amount of viral load that will get in people’s faces and bodies, could be less infectious than plastic vials or carton boxes or whatever fomites thought to be transmitting this disease despite all the hygienic measures taken by commerce agents.

    Some explanations about these and other mysteries are in order.

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
    @Brás Cubas

    A complement to my previous comment:

    This article seems to be based on this summary from April 22:

    https://dontforgetthebubbles.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/COVID-data-top-10.pdf

    Research seems to variously suggest either:

    (1) Children don't pass the disease.

    or

    (2) Children don't pass the disease to adults.

    Number (1), if confirmed, would be really unexpected and unexplained. Number (2) may be due to the difference of heights between children and adults, added to voluntary measures of caution (e.g., not hugging). If that is the case, suppressing those measures of caution may be dangerous, since children will then expel their aerosols and droplets onto adults' faces rather than at the level of their waists or legs.

  14. @Kaz
    What a bizzare disease.

    Aren't kids THE vector for spreading around usually mild sickness like the flu and colds?

    Replies: @Alice

    Do we know that? or do we just assume that because kids have poor hygiene?

    influenza is NOT mild! that falsehood is feeding the fear here because most people no longer remember getting influenza.

    you get sick. you go to the doc. you get well. post hoc prompter hoc fallacy that the doc cured you, right? because most of the time you get better anyway.

    kid gets sick. you get sick. same fallacy. maybe you just came into contact with the same source your kid did.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Alice

    Alice, in January of this year a Buffalo News front page story was the death of 11 year old Luca Calanni who died from the flu. I personally know this family. Luca was a very active healthy lad who had a flu shot. Diagnosed on Jan 6 and dead on the 9th. Flu is dangerous and can be deadly and is here every year.

  15. @Andrew M
    There was a group of 211 students from the University of Texas at Austin who travelled to Cabo San Lucas (Mexico) for spring break. 49 of them later tested positive for Covid-19. I assume the students were all firmly under 30; and I assume they weren’t partying with 70 year olds. Based on the media portrayal of spring breakers, I assume that none of them were overweight and they were all in excellent health.

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    How many of them were hospitalized ? Probably none of them were hospitalized, we know none of them died from CV , they are much more likely to die from drugs. Did any of the 21 college students spread the disease to their parents ?

  16. While he said that it was possible children could infect others, there had not been a case to date and there was “no evidence that closing schools is an effective measure”.

    This just in …

    A blow for plans to reopen schools? Children DO catch the coronavirus as often as adults and could spread it to older relatives, study finds


    The study, done in Shenzhen, found the virus’s ‘attack rate’ among children was 7.4 per cent, which was on par with the 6.6 per cent seen in the general population.

    One scientist in England said the research was ‘important’ and showed that children ‘could expose parents, grandparents and teachers… risking a second wave’.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8272905/Children-catch-coronavirus-adults-study-finds.html

    Maybe that is just Chinese propaganda to keep the West locked down a few more months, or maybe English “experts” are reading more into it. Who knows? This battle of experts is getting to be like that banjo scene from Deliverance.

    Then there was this earlier this week:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8264135/UK-says-children-died-syndrome-linked-COVID-19.html

  17. @Mike Tre
    Perhaps this is the question that should have been asked before governor's started remanding children to their homes indefinitely.

    Let's exacerbate the already significant problem of kids being addicted to media tablets and adopting a sedentary lifestyle, by removing all of the alternative activities.

    Replies: @Alice, @Dissident

    Yup, they’re killing our kids.

    and let me say I Told You So. Some of us DID ask this BEFORE they closed schools, back when the CDC was saying keep them open and states weren’t listening. Because how come schoolteachers weren’t already in hospital?

    We were told we were death loving murderous Typhoid Marys for saying it aloud.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Alice


    Yup, they’re killing our kids.

    and let me say I Told You So. Some of us DID ask this BEFORE they closed schools, back when the CDC was saying keep them open and states weren’t listening. Because how come schoolteachers weren’t already in hospital?
     

    I don't where you live, but my kids go to a small private school with a faculty of about 15. One teacher and the principal were already sick with Covid-19 ("official" cases) six weeks ago.
  18. Now that you have enlightened your ignorant alt right readers about the non danger of Covid spreading from the little ships to important people, aka adults, it is time to exonerate the most maligned group of Americans, Chiroptera-Americans or in the common vulgar slur expression Bats. I would use the B word but the B word already references another B word.

    No, Aussie bats won’t give you COVID-19. We rely on them more than you think
    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-aussie-wont-covid-.html

  19. This is great news,. Let’s turn the country over to the children. Can’t do worse than the leaders we now have.

    • Replies: @George
    @Buffalo Joe

    Why not just eliminate High School. K-12 would become K-10 or less.

  20. @utu
    @Meretricious

    Talk to your doctor.

    "conjunctivitis and severe eye pain have also been reported"
    https://www.aao.org/headline/alert-important-coronavirus-context

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    utu, if you have health issues and live alone subscribe to a help line like “Life Alert”

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Buffalo Joe

    First and foremost, most cell phones can be set up for voice dialing. If it's not already built into your phone you can download a free app.

    You can also get "I've fallen and I can't get up" buttons as add ons to your home alarm system if you have one. Some of these can be worn like a wristwatch, which is less obtrusive than the kind on a neck lanyard.

    If you have an Amazon Echo or similar device it can also make phone calls on voice command. And the Echo is listening to the room at all times so you don't even have to have it on your body. You can just shout out to it.

    The other day I was programming the buttons on my 97 year old mother in law's phone (not touch screen cell phone but land line type) and in the course of programming 911 I must have accidentally dialed it and immediately hung up. About 5 minutes later a cop showed up at the house to check if everything was OK. When you dial 911 your address shows up and they dispatch someone if you hang up without talking.

    In short, there are many ways to skin this cat, but you need to do a little advance planning. When you are lying helpless on the ground is not the time to start setting this up.

  21. @Meretricious
    My eyes were acting strange tonight. They felt like worms were crawling inside them. I rubbed the heck out fof them even though we're not supposed to touch our eyes. But they were killing me.

    Now thyreyre all red swollen and painful.. I just realized that if I woke up sightless I'd have no way of getting help. Impossible to navigate touch screen menus without sight.

    This is why you live longer with a spouse. Someone to summon help as well as look out for you if you end up in the hospital.

    Replies: @utu, @Buffalo Joe

    Mere, sorry sent my reply to utu and not you. If you live alone and have health issues subscribe to a help line service like “Life Alert.”

  22. On the face of it this seems almost absurd. This conclusion presumes that ‘authorities’ know precisely how each of the world’s three-plus million virus victims were infected. I must be missing something.

  23. @Buffalo Joe
    @utu

    utu, if you have health issues and live alone subscribe to a help line like "Life Alert"

    Replies: @Jack D

    First and foremost, most cell phones can be set up for voice dialing. If it’s not already built into your phone you can download a free app.

    You can also get “I’ve fallen and I can’t get up” buttons as add ons to your home alarm system if you have one. Some of these can be worn like a wristwatch, which is less obtrusive than the kind on a neck lanyard.

    If you have an Amazon Echo or similar device it can also make phone calls on voice command. And the Echo is listening to the room at all times so you don’t even have to have it on your body. You can just shout out to it.

    The other day I was programming the buttons on my 97 year old mother in law’s phone (not touch screen cell phone but land line type) and in the course of programming 911 I must have accidentally dialed it and immediately hung up. About 5 minutes later a cop showed up at the house to check if everything was OK. When you dial 911 your address shows up and they dispatch someone if you hang up without talking.

    In short, there are many ways to skin this cat, but you need to do a little advance planning. When you are lying helpless on the ground is not the time to start setting this up.

  24. Maybe, Charles Dickens was wrong about putting children to work?

  25. @Dr doomNgloom
    If children cannot spread to adults, then they are irrelevant to herd immunity.

    Replies: @Jack D

    It’s not that they are irrelevant, it just means that they can already in effect be put in the “immune” column. So if children are 20% of the population then we are already a good way toward herd immunity on day 1.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Jack D

    While obviously getting 50% infected out of 100% is more than getting 50% out of 80% the estimate when that may happen will not change because the estimates of the reproductive numbers Ro did not include children as they had no role in Ro if they indeed do not spread infections among adults.

    , @Dr. DoomNGloom
    @Jack D

    It’s not that they are irrelevant, it just means that they can already in effect be put in the “immune” column. So if children are 20% of the population then we are already a good way toward herd immunity on day 1.

    I don't think that's quite right. Would we be 20% (for the sake of argument) toward herd immunity if those children were to simply vanish as though in a Twilight Zone episode?
    Instead, I think the herd immunity models have some implicit assumptions about subject to subject contact.

    Thinking out loud,
    Randomly immunizing people would reduce the fraction contacts that include a contagious-susceptible dyad.

    Randomly removing people would reduce the population without changing contagion ratio ratio. So that would be different than immunity.

    Immunizing only children would have some other kind of effect, because children-adult contacts are decidedly different in frequency and dispersion than adult-adult.

    We do know that this virus has an enormously high spread factor, if that's without children, then what does it mean? Probably that we need a higher fraction of immunity for herd immunity to kick in. That assumes that the R factor depends upon the degree of courageousness as well as the frequency and dispersion of contact.

  26. just today the most famous COVID 19 specialist in Germany – Prof. Drosten – published a study which says that probably children can infect others as much as adults, I don’t have a link to an english article, but there are several german articles about this today. So much seems to be still unclear…

  27. French high school serology results say it was transmitted to 40% of students/staff/teachers and about a quarter of infected students’ parents, which suggests it spreads at least among and from adolescents.

    It may be that it would be safer to open elementary schools than high schools, but doubt that will be a popular solution.

    Here’s the paper

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.18.20071134v1

    • Replies: @res
    @Spotted Toad

    Thanks! I thought the equating of "children" to "under 10" in the article Steve linked was interesting. I think this excerpt from your link gives a pretty good sense of what they saw.


    Of the 661 participants, 171 participants had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (see Supplementary material), giving an overall IAR of 25.9% (95% confidence interval (CI); 22.6-29.4), and an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0% (one-sided 97.5% CI = 0 - 2.1). Nine of the ten hospitalised were in the SARSCoV-2 infected group, giving a hospitalisation rate of 5.3% (95% CI = 2.4 –9.8). The median age of hospitalised participants was higher compared to non-hospitalised in the SARS-CoV-2 infected group (49.0 versus 17.7 years, respectively; P = 0.04). Among the 171 participants with confirmed SARSCoV-2 infection, the proportions of those with major, minor or no symptoms were 70.8% (95% CI = 63.3-77.5), 12.3% (95% CI = 7.8-18.2), and 17.0% (95% CI = 11.2 – 23.4), respectively.
     
    I think this bit does give some support for high school children not being effective vectors though (which I would find to be extremely surprising, with important implications for school closures, which seemed to help based on the Kinsa data). Notice the low IAR among parents and siblings.
    IAR is infection attack rate (i.e. proportion infected).

    There was no difference in IAR between males and females, while IAR was highest (40.0%) in the 15-17 years age group. The IAR was higher in the high school group (38.3% 43.4%, and 59.3% for pupils, teachers, and school staff, respectively) than in parents and siblings (11.4% and 10.2%, respectively) (P <0.001). Smoking was found to be associated with a lower risk of infection (7.2% versus 28.0% for smokers and non-smokers, respectively
     

    Replies: @utu

  28. So an elderly teacher would be safest among a group of kids.

    • Agree: Alice
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @ken


    So an elderly teacher would be safest among a group of kids.
     
    In most neighborhoods, yes.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2t85Yt9NgCQ

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mOytxf75H-U

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w9quEzgHUKo
  29. @Spotted Toad
    French high school serology results say it was transmitted to 40% of students/staff/teachers and about a quarter of infected students' parents, which suggests it spreads at least among and from adolescents.

    https://twitter.com/aClassicLiberal/status/1254540847040868352

    It may be that it would be safer to open elementary schools than high schools, but doubt that will be a popular solution.

    Here's the paper

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.18.20071134v1

    Replies: @res

    Thanks! I thought the equating of “children” to “under 10” in the article Steve linked was interesting. I think this excerpt from your link gives a pretty good sense of what they saw.

    Of the 661 participants, 171 participants had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (see Supplementary material), giving an overall IAR of 25.9% (95% confidence interval (CI); 22.6-29.4), and an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0% (one-sided 97.5% CI = 0 – 2.1). Nine of the ten hospitalised were in the SARSCoV-2 infected group, giving a hospitalisation rate of 5.3% (95% CI = 2.4 –9.8). The median age of hospitalised participants was higher compared to non-hospitalised in the SARS-CoV-2 infected group (49.0 versus 17.7 years, respectively; P = 0.04). Among the 171 participants with confirmed SARSCoV-2 infection, the proportions of those with major, minor or no symptoms were 70.8% (95% CI = 63.3-77.5), 12.3% (95% CI = 7.8-18.2), and 17.0% (95% CI = 11.2 – 23.4), respectively.

    I think this bit does give some support for high school children not being effective vectors though (which I would find to be extremely surprising, with important implications for school closures, which seemed to help based on the Kinsa data). Notice the low IAR among parents and siblings.
    IAR is infection attack rate (i.e. proportion infected).

    There was no difference in IAR between males and females, while IAR was highest (40.0%) in the 15-17 years age group. The IAR was higher in the high school group (38.3% 43.4%, and 59.3% for pupils, teachers, and school staff, respectively) than in parents and siblings (11.4% and 10.2%, respectively) (P <0.001). Smoking was found to be associated with a lower risk of infection (7.2% versus 28.0% for smokers and non-smokers, respectively

    • Replies: @utu
    @res

    Smoking was found to be associated with a lower risk of infection (7.2% versus 28.0% for smokers and non-smokers, respectively. The herd immunity for the society of smokers could be achieved on much lower level. Is it possible that Greece or Russia with 40% of adult population smoking need just 10-15% among not smokers to be infected to get the herd immunity? Is it possible that low smoking rates in NY (11%) and Italy (25%) have something to to with the intensity of the epidemic.

    Epidemic correlation studies were done to check the viability of the BCG hypothesis but there are no data on the individual patient level to verify it while so far there are plenty of such data concerning smoking. Smoking is much stronger hypothesis there is than many others. Where is Phillip Morris?

  30. @Jack D
    @Dr doomNgloom

    It's not that they are irrelevant, it just means that they can already in effect be put in the "immune" column. So if children are 20% of the population then we are already a good way toward herd immunity on day 1.

    Replies: @utu, @Dr. DoomNGloom

    While obviously getting 50% infected out of 100% is more than getting 50% out of 80% the estimate when that may happen will not change because the estimates of the reproductive numbers Ro did not include children as they had no role in Ro if they indeed do not spread infections among adults.

  31. @Brás Cubas
    A few weeks ago the big breakthrough story was that asymptomatics play a major role in transmitting the disease. That was the major factor that pushed authorities to recommend the use of masks.

    Now comes this. Children play no major role. And after they say that, they add: they are frequently asymptomatic, as if that had something to do with the fact that they do not transmit the virus.

    But asymptomatic adults play a "major" role in transmitting it, right? So why the association between the two facts when talking about children?

    Cough is one of the reported early symptoms, both in children and in adults. Why is children's cough more harmless than adults' cough? I can't think of a reason why.

    There is a lachrymose (but with a happy ending) story that's been circulating about a 4-year-old who caught this virus and got terribly sick, and his exams were atypical (why?), and his dad showed only mild symptoms *a few days after the child got sick*. Was this a case where the dad transmitted the disease to his son while asymptomatic and then got sick himself? How likely is that? The story does not say whether the mother got sick (why?).

    https://www.time24.news/t24/2020/04/coronavirus-it-was-torture-to-watch-your-fight-doctor-reports-anguish-of-seeing-her-4-year-old-son-with-covid-19.html

    Also, this family was in near total isolation, so they have no idea how they caught it. In Brazil, they are increasingly reporting cases like that in the nonscientific media. I can't think of an explanation to how children's cough, which is certain to contain a fair amount of viral load that will get in people's faces and bodies, could be less infectious than plastic vials or carton boxes or whatever fomites thought to be transmitting this disease despite all the hygienic measures taken by commerce agents.

    Some explanations about these and other mysteries are in order.

    Replies: @Brás Cubas

    A complement to my previous comment:

    This article seems to be based on this summary from April 22:

    https://dontforgetthebubbles.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/COVID-data-top-10.pdf

    Research seems to variously suggest either:

    (1) Children don’t pass the disease.

    or

    (2) Children don’t pass the disease to adults.

    Number (1), if confirmed, would be really unexpected and unexplained. Number (2) may be due to the difference of heights between children and adults, added to voluntary measures of caution (e.g., not hugging). If that is the case, suppressing those measures of caution may be dangerous, since children will then expel their aerosols and droplets onto adults’ faces rather than at the level of their waists or legs.

  32. All the more reason, if true, to let this thing run its course through younger people. They might benefit from the antibodies and future immunity, you know?

    As someone who has been accused of being one of those awful baby boomers here, I wholeheartedly say this shutdown is causing massive damage to young people to slightly help old people.

    “The Unfairness of It All” is obvious.

    Let older and vulnerable people “shut down,” and let everyone else live, work and be productive. That way, we don’t all kill ourselves, young and old, en masse.

    • Replies: @Polynikes
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I don't think it has to be an either/or proposition between the young vs. old. Had we taken a clear lucid look at the numbers coming out early on, we could've fairly predicted much of this. Very early numbers from Italy, while somewhat messy, were pretty clear that the old and people with co-morbidities were making up the bulk of casualties.

    Had we then taken a deep breath and took 10% of the resources expended so far and targeted them on protecting the old and weak while having everyone else follow best practices (e.g. wash hands, wear masks, avoid large crowds, etc..) we avoided most of the damage from the lockdowns and potentially even mitigated a fair amount of the damage from the virus.

    I think if you take a fair look back over the last month-plus of comments you will find some people suggesting that, even back then.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind

  33. @res
    @Spotted Toad

    Thanks! I thought the equating of "children" to "under 10" in the article Steve linked was interesting. I think this excerpt from your link gives a pretty good sense of what they saw.


    Of the 661 participants, 171 participants had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (see Supplementary material), giving an overall IAR of 25.9% (95% confidence interval (CI); 22.6-29.4), and an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0% (one-sided 97.5% CI = 0 - 2.1). Nine of the ten hospitalised were in the SARSCoV-2 infected group, giving a hospitalisation rate of 5.3% (95% CI = 2.4 –9.8). The median age of hospitalised participants was higher compared to non-hospitalised in the SARS-CoV-2 infected group (49.0 versus 17.7 years, respectively; P = 0.04). Among the 171 participants with confirmed SARSCoV-2 infection, the proportions of those with major, minor or no symptoms were 70.8% (95% CI = 63.3-77.5), 12.3% (95% CI = 7.8-18.2), and 17.0% (95% CI = 11.2 – 23.4), respectively.
     
    I think this bit does give some support for high school children not being effective vectors though (which I would find to be extremely surprising, with important implications for school closures, which seemed to help based on the Kinsa data). Notice the low IAR among parents and siblings.
    IAR is infection attack rate (i.e. proportion infected).

    There was no difference in IAR between males and females, while IAR was highest (40.0%) in the 15-17 years age group. The IAR was higher in the high school group (38.3% 43.4%, and 59.3% for pupils, teachers, and school staff, respectively) than in parents and siblings (11.4% and 10.2%, respectively) (P <0.001). Smoking was found to be associated with a lower risk of infection (7.2% versus 28.0% for smokers and non-smokers, respectively
     

    Replies: @utu

    Smoking was found to be associated with a lower risk of infection (7.2% versus 28.0% for smokers and non-smokers, respectively. The herd immunity for the society of smokers could be achieved on much lower level. Is it possible that Greece or Russia with 40% of adult population smoking need just 10-15% among not smokers to be infected to get the herd immunity? Is it possible that low smoking rates in NY (11%) and Italy (25%) have something to to with the intensity of the epidemic.

    Epidemic correlation studies were done to check the viability of the BCG hypothesis but there are no data on the individual patient level to verify it while so far there are plenty of such data concerning smoking. Smoking is much stronger hypothesis there is than many others. Where is Phillip Morris?

  34. Anonymous[135] • Disclaimer says:

    Once again the Sailer PILOT FISH are proven wrong. Idiotic thread barnacles same crew posting here. Wrong on race issues wrong on everything else.

    I pounded this obvious fact ASYMPTOMATIC CHILD SPREADERS WAS TOTAL BULLSHIT it was clear in fucking late Feb from China/Italy data. Children were absent from the entire affair! There never was any cohort of school teachers struck down en masse by classroom infection. Never fucking happened.

    The vector profile had emerged anyone could see the basic characteristics. The Diamond Princess and later the Grand Princess data demolished PROJECT FEAR scare tactics.

    More obvious truths…

    MASKS block hand to face and face to face facial touching. That is their primary effect on the disease vector.

    AIRPLANES were not exploding petri dishes even on the longest flights.

    OUTDOOR SPREAD is another complete bullshit story. It’s a fucking droplet spread disease. Droplets drop. The corrupt CDC/FDA machinery is there to BLUR THE DROPLET SPREAD AND ACTUAL AEROSOL SPREAD.

    And on and on. We are in a war people. Wake up…

    • Agree: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @utu
    @Anonymous

    " to BLUR THE DROPLET SPREAD AND ACTUAL AEROSOL SPREAD" - It has to be blurred. Microdroplets float and depending on relative humidity they either keep evaporating and thus float longer or gain size by condensation and then start dropping faster.

    Breathing ejects droplets at 1 m, coughing at 2 m and sneezing at 6 m.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17542834

    SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols throughout the duration of our experiment (3 hours)

    SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, and viable virus was detected up to 72 hours after application to these surfaces
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973

    , @Muggles
    @Anonymous

    As to your claims, I can't say.

    But we all know that using anger, profanity, ALL CAPS and unverified assertions does make what you say much more persuasive to the ignorant.

    I assume you live alone.

  35. @LondonBob
    Would explain why this virus peaks early, just doesn't get transmitted the ways others do and herd immunity is already there to a significant extent.

    Replies: @utu, @leterip

    I wondered the same thing.

    The typical required herd immunity number thrown around is 60% for covid. But if children can not be vectors, then the required herd immunity % would be lower – say 55%.

    And if older children are not vectors, it could be lower still. Say 45-50%.

    And if some mild suppression was kept in place, say hand washing and no large gatherings, the required herd immunity % could be even lower still.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    @leterip

    All countries seem to get a version of Farr's epidemic model except the tail on the downside is long and declines only slowly. If children were the traditional vector of transmission then a virus that is this contagious would be a lot more exponential and then die out as quickly. The dramatic spikes we have seen, such as in Italy, have been tied to specific events where adults have congregated and been in close contact, like the Atalanta football match.

  36. Ok, if kids can’t get sick then put then put to work. The online schooling they are enduring is just “busy work.” Wait staff, counter staff, grocery clerks, easy enough. Farmers need help and so do meat packing plants, well with some safety training of course. Don’t want little digits mixed in with the chicken nuggets. And ordain a few so I can go back to Mass.

    • Replies: @Dissident
    @Buffalo Joe


    Ok, if kids can’t get sick then put then put to work. [...]Farmers need help and so do meat packing plants, well with some safety training of course.
     
    You would hardly be the first to argue that child-labor laws as presently constructed are not as simple as the Respectable/Progressive narrative would have one believe.

    No decent man wishes to see children subjected-to abusive or unsafe conditions, or deprived of the opportunity to reach their educational potential*. But there are any number of productive jobs that children from a certain age could do that not only would be quite safe** but also vastly more wholesome and beneficial (for both the children themselves as well as society-at-large), at least in many cases, than what they do now. And that includes, for what are no doubt many, at least much of the time spent in school. (See below)

    Similarly, with regard to the minimum wage. One who is dependent upon working a full-time should be able to earn a decent living doing so. But a high school kid well-supported by his parents who is just looking to gain some pocket money and work experience after school, on weekends or during the summer?

    The older I get, the more I realize that contentious issues such as these are rarely, if ever, as simple as portrayed by those on either of their polar ends .

    *Though for most, that is surely much humbler than the dogma and pieties of the prevailing orthodoxy and bloated, entrenched education complex allow for. Universal college, certainly, is an utter folly, and one that does much harm. But even secondary education above a certain age and level is likely wasted on many, if not most. And even at the primary level, if the choice is between Woke indoctrination and productive labor...

    **Given prudent precautions and regulation to ensure that they are taken.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

  37. Whenever you hear “herd immunity” you know that some politician’s fucked up really badly, and irreparably, and are looking for some plausible lie to cover their asses.

    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  38. @Anonymous
    Once again the Sailer PILOT FISH are proven wrong. Idiotic thread barnacles same crew posting here. Wrong on race issues wrong on everything else.

    I pounded this obvious fact ASYMPTOMATIC CHILD SPREADERS WAS TOTAL BULLSHIT it was clear in fucking late Feb from China/Italy data. Children were absent from the entire affair! There never was any cohort of school teachers struck down en masse by classroom infection. Never fucking happened.

    The vector profile had emerged anyone could see the basic characteristics. The Diamond Princess and later the Grand Princess data demolished PROJECT FEAR scare tactics.

    More obvious truths...

    MASKS block hand to face and face to face facial touching. That is their primary effect on the disease vector.

    AIRPLANES were not exploding petri dishes even on the longest flights.

    OUTDOOR SPREAD is another complete bullshit story. It's a fucking droplet spread disease. Droplets drop. The corrupt CDC/FDA machinery is there to BLUR THE DROPLET SPREAD AND ACTUAL AEROSOL SPREAD.

    And on and on. We are in a war people. Wake up...

    Replies: @utu, @Muggles

    ” to BLUR THE DROPLET SPREAD AND ACTUAL AEROSOL SPREAD” – It has to be blurred. Microdroplets float and depending on relative humidity they either keep evaporating and thus float longer or gain size by condensation and then start dropping faster.

    Breathing ejects droplets at 1 m, coughing at 2 m and sneezing at 6 m.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17542834

    SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols throughout the duration of our experiment (3 hours)

    SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, and viable virus was detected up to 72 hours after application to these surfaces
    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973

  39. @Buzz Mohawk
    All the more reason, if true, to let this thing run its course through younger people. They might benefit from the antibodies and future immunity, you know?

    As someone who has been accused of being one of those awful baby boomers here, I wholeheartedly say this shutdown is causing massive damage to young people to slightly help old people.

    "The Unfairness of It All" is obvious.

    Let older and vulnerable people "shut down," and let everyone else live, work and be productive. That way, we don't all kill ourselves, young and old, en masse.

    Replies: @Polynikes

    I don’t think it has to be an either/or proposition between the young vs. old. Had we taken a clear lucid look at the numbers coming out early on, we could’ve fairly predicted much of this. Very early numbers from Italy, while somewhat messy, were pretty clear that the old and people with co-morbidities were making up the bulk of casualties.

    Had we then taken a deep breath and took 10% of the resources expended so far and targeted them on protecting the old and weak while having everyone else follow best practices (e.g. wash hands, wear masks, avoid large crowds, etc..) we avoided most of the damage from the lockdowns and potentially even mitigated a fair amount of the damage from the virus.

    I think if you take a fair look back over the last month-plus of comments you will find some people suggesting that, even back then.

    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    @Polynikes

    Two questions.

    Some of the "hard-core" faction are claiming that the Governor of New York has been killing old people by placing persons with the Virus into nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

    The send I got from a quick Web search is not that Mr. Cuomo is visiting the Plague of Jinping on old people by stuffing Virus spreading people into care facilities, rather, he is hiding behind New York law that nursing homes cannot turn people away, "and we will grant them exceptions if they lack the facilities or PPE to properly isolate those patients."

    Letting anyone into a nursing home with the Virus is a lame idea. What happened to setting up field hospitals for Virus cases in empty sports venues? You think that someone with the Virus, even an old person, could be sent anywhere except into a nursing home. But is Fredo's brother rubbing his hands with glee that he can do in old people, or is he too intellectually disabled and stubborn about enforcing existing laws that make zero sense and made New York the globe's Hot Spot?

    Second question, what did President Trump actually say about bleach or disinfectant and using it to rid your lungs of the Virus? Was it meant metaphorically, or was Mr. Trump acting as goofy as Mr. Biden? A lot of the Eyores on the Right Blogosphere, including commenters here, if I am not mistaken, are ready to invoke the 25 Amendment on this. Did it even happen, or is this yet another one of these things taken way out of context?

  40. Children should be screened but not herd.

    • LOL: Dissident
  41. @Anonymous
    Once again the Sailer PILOT FISH are proven wrong. Idiotic thread barnacles same crew posting here. Wrong on race issues wrong on everything else.

    I pounded this obvious fact ASYMPTOMATIC CHILD SPREADERS WAS TOTAL BULLSHIT it was clear in fucking late Feb from China/Italy data. Children were absent from the entire affair! There never was any cohort of school teachers struck down en masse by classroom infection. Never fucking happened.

    The vector profile had emerged anyone could see the basic characteristics. The Diamond Princess and later the Grand Princess data demolished PROJECT FEAR scare tactics.

    More obvious truths...

    MASKS block hand to face and face to face facial touching. That is their primary effect on the disease vector.

    AIRPLANES were not exploding petri dishes even on the longest flights.

    OUTDOOR SPREAD is another complete bullshit story. It's a fucking droplet spread disease. Droplets drop. The corrupt CDC/FDA machinery is there to BLUR THE DROPLET SPREAD AND ACTUAL AEROSOL SPREAD.

    And on and on. We are in a war people. Wake up...

    Replies: @utu, @Muggles

    As to your claims, I can’t say.

    But we all know that using anger, profanity, ALL CAPS and unverified assertions does make what you say much more persuasive to the ignorant.

    I assume you live alone.

  42. @Buffalo Joe
    This is great news,. Let's turn the country over to the children. Can't do worse than the leaders we now have.

    Replies: @George

    Why not just eliminate High School. K-12 would become K-10 or less.

  43. @Jack D
    @Dr doomNgloom

    It's not that they are irrelevant, it just means that they can already in effect be put in the "immune" column. So if children are 20% of the population then we are already a good way toward herd immunity on day 1.

    Replies: @utu, @Dr. DoomNGloom

    It’s not that they are irrelevant, it just means that they can already in effect be put in the “immune” column. So if children are 20% of the population then we are already a good way toward herd immunity on day 1.

    I don’t think that’s quite right. Would we be 20% (for the sake of argument) toward herd immunity if those children were to simply vanish as though in a Twilight Zone episode?
    Instead, I think the herd immunity models have some implicit assumptions about subject to subject contact.

    Thinking out loud,
    Randomly immunizing people would reduce the fraction contacts that include a contagious-susceptible dyad.

    Randomly removing people would reduce the population without changing contagion ratio ratio. So that would be different than immunity.

    Immunizing only children would have some other kind of effect, because children-adult contacts are decidedly different in frequency and dispersion than adult-adult.

    We do know that this virus has an enormously high spread factor, if that’s without children, then what does it mean? Probably that we need a higher fraction of immunity for herd immunity to kick in. That assumes that the R factor depends upon the degree of courageousness as well as the frequency and dispersion of contact.

  44. @moshe
    Yes!

    I literally just logged in here to ask the question that you are dealing with here.

    Guidelines are good. They are imperfect but, alas, it is a fallen world and everyone is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Guidelines however are supposed to advise us regarding our best chances.

    It is now clear to everyone that coronavirus only kills people who are about to die anyway. Perhaps however it does shoeten their lifespan by up to 3 years.

    Perhaps.

    But assuming it does, it's A Good Thing to stay away from people with serious medical conditions when you are sick. If we get a law mandating that people with any sort of communicable illness stay home or risk getting a ticket I'm cool with that.

    Is that the sum total of what we need?

    Can EVERYONE go and do as they please and simply stay away from grandpa if ill, like we've always been doing?

    We've been told that "if you mingle while well you are (unwittingly spreading the disease and) murdering people".

    Pretty much in those words.

    Is there any evidence for that?

    Half of the deaths attributed to coronavirus are of people in nursing homes. Most of whom it now appears died due to neglect and bad treatment that was brought on by The Panic (as mentioned in an earlier comment I have some knowledge about nursing home residents and their needs).

    I am coming around to believe that social distancing is not just bad but deadly and that it has caused more deaths than the virus has.

    I'm not in the right country to do so but if I were, I would very seriously consider visiting my elderly grandfather. I am fairly confident that if this virus is pernicious at all, it is not perniciously communicable from people who aren't themselves sick.

    As much as most rich and bored people wished it were so, this is not The Plague and avoiding it does more damage than ignoring it.

    This is a First World Problem, aka NOT a problem.

    Replies: @Dissident

    It is now clear to everyone that coronavirus only kills people who are about to die anyway.

    Mostly or even overwhelmingly =/= only. Would you deny that there have been casualties that do not fit your exaggerated characterization?

    Denialists like you are the inverse of the hysterics/full-lockdown types at the other extreme. As with Jews can do no right vs. Jews can do no wrong, and any number of other false dichotomies, reality, reason, justice and decency are found at various points along the vast expanse that lies between the cartoon fringes.

  45. @Alice
    @Kaz

    Do we know that? or do we just assume that because kids have poor hygiene?

    influenza is NOT mild! that falsehood is feeding the fear here because most people no longer remember getting influenza.

    you get sick. you go to the doc. you get well. post hoc prompter hoc fallacy that the doc cured you, right? because most of the time you get better anyway.

    kid gets sick. you get sick. same fallacy. maybe you just came into contact with the same source your kid did.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Alice, in January of this year a Buffalo News front page story was the death of 11 year old Luca Calanni who died from the flu. I personally know this family. Luca was a very active healthy lad who had a flu shot. Diagnosed on Jan 6 and dead on the 9th. Flu is dangerous and can be deadly and is here every year.

  46. @Mike Tre
    Perhaps this is the question that should have been asked before governor's started remanding children to their homes indefinitely.

    Let's exacerbate the already significant problem of kids being addicted to media tablets and adopting a sedentary lifestyle, by removing all of the alternative activities.

    Replies: @Alice, @Dissident

    doing kid stuff!

    Of course, we can’t begin to know the whole story but your comment reminded me of that.

    [MORE]

    The Horse and His Boy 1
    boy surrounded by majesty
    Boyhood
    tales in the wood

  47. There’s an interview with one of the Swedish epidemiologists, who has designed their current laissez faire strategy.

    It’s actually quite ideological (he criticizes Eastern European countries as more undemocratic). One of things he talks about is that coronavirus is not spread by children, unlike influenza – at 26:00.

  48. @Buffalo Joe
    Ok, if kids can't get sick then put then put to work. The online schooling they are enduring is just "busy work." Wait staff, counter staff, grocery clerks, easy enough. Farmers need help and so do meat packing plants, well with some safety training of course. Don't want little digits mixed in with the chicken nuggets. And ordain a few so I can go back to Mass.

    Replies: @Dissident

    Ok, if kids can’t get sick then put then put to work. […]Farmers need help and so do meat packing plants, well with some safety training of course.

    You would hardly be the first to argue that child-labor laws as presently constructed are not as simple as the Respectable/Progressive narrative would have one believe.

    No decent man wishes to see children subjected-to abusive or unsafe conditions, or deprived of the opportunity to reach their educational potential*. But there are any number of productive jobs that children from a certain age could do that not only would be quite safe** but also vastly more wholesome and beneficial (for both the children themselves as well as society-at-large), at least in many cases, than what they do now. And that includes, for what are no doubt many, at least much of the time spent in school. (See below)

    Similarly, with regard to the minimum wage.

    [MORE]
    One who is dependent upon working a full-time should be able to earn a decent living doing so. But a high school kid well-supported by his parents who is just looking to gain some pocket money and work experience after school, on weekends or during the summer?

    The older I get, the more I realize that contentious issues such as these are rarely, if ever, as simple as portrayed by those on either of their polar ends .

    *Though for most, that is surely much humbler than the dogma and pieties of the prevailing orthodoxy and bloated, entrenched education complex allow for. Universal college, certainly, is an utter folly, and one that does much harm. But even secondary education above a certain age and level is likely wasted on many, if not most. And even at the primary level, if the choice is between Woke indoctrination and productive labor…

    **Given prudent precautions and regulation to ensure that they are taken.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Dissident

    Diss, excellent reply.

  49. @ken
    So an elderly teacher would be safest among a group of kids.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    So an elderly teacher would be safest among a group of kids.

    In most neighborhoods, yes.

  50. Oh, well:

    Would be rather strange, if children could not transmit this virus.

    Anyway, in Dutch:
    Duitse virologen: ‘Kinderen mogelijk net zo besmettelijk als anderen
    https://nos.nl/artikel/2332269-duitse-virologen-kinderen-mogelijk-net-zo-besmettelijk-als-anderen.html

    Also:
    https://www.businessinsider.com/children-do-transmit-covid-19-says-researcher-amid-confusion-2020-4

  51. According to Israel Health Ministry, it is possible for children to transmit the virus, but at lower rates than adults. Israel has mainly ended its lockdown from April 19, and is re-starting schools on Sunday.

    Most of the epidemic in Israel was among Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) and Bedouin sectors due to their lawlessness and lack of social distance, but which have low median age. The most infected city (Bnei Brak) in Israel, has median age below 20 – there are estimations that 38% of the city was infected with coronavirus.

    Israeli study says children carry virus, infect others, but at a lower rate

    The Health Ministry on Thursday released an epidemiological study that will be used to determine whether daycares, kindergartens and schools are given the final go ahead to open on Friday.

    The study found that children can carry and transmit the disease, but at a lower rate than adults. The authors emphasized that the findings were preliminary

    The study (Hebrew link) tracked the spread of the virus in 562 households with 2,823 total people in Bnei Brak, over half of whom were under the age of 20. Bnei Brak saw a severe outbreak of the disease last month.

    Children in households with at least one family member who had the virus were 20-50 percent less likely to get infected than adults, with younger children less likely to contract the disease than older ones, the report said.

    Children were 20%-75% less likely than adults to infect others. The chances of transmission rise with age, though those under a year can also be highly contagious, the report said.

    Infants were more susceptible to infection than other children, possibly due to closer contact with parents or breastfeeding while their mothers were infected, the report said.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-says-children-carry-virus-infect-others-but-at-a-lower-rate/

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    @Dmitry

    I would guess the immune system is so strong that it deals with the virus quick enough that the children don't have an opportunity to spread the virus. So they can transmit it but in practice they don't, we haven't seen a great outbreak amongst teachers here in London so it isn't likely an issue.

  52. @Dissident
    @Buffalo Joe


    Ok, if kids can’t get sick then put then put to work. [...]Farmers need help and so do meat packing plants, well with some safety training of course.
     
    You would hardly be the first to argue that child-labor laws as presently constructed are not as simple as the Respectable/Progressive narrative would have one believe.

    No decent man wishes to see children subjected-to abusive or unsafe conditions, or deprived of the opportunity to reach their educational potential*. But there are any number of productive jobs that children from a certain age could do that not only would be quite safe** but also vastly more wholesome and beneficial (for both the children themselves as well as society-at-large), at least in many cases, than what they do now. And that includes, for what are no doubt many, at least much of the time spent in school. (See below)

    Similarly, with regard to the minimum wage. One who is dependent upon working a full-time should be able to earn a decent living doing so. But a high school kid well-supported by his parents who is just looking to gain some pocket money and work experience after school, on weekends or during the summer?

    The older I get, the more I realize that contentious issues such as these are rarely, if ever, as simple as portrayed by those on either of their polar ends .

    *Though for most, that is surely much humbler than the dogma and pieties of the prevailing orthodoxy and bloated, entrenched education complex allow for. Universal college, certainly, is an utter folly, and one that does much harm. But even secondary education above a certain age and level is likely wasted on many, if not most. And even at the primary level, if the choice is between Woke indoctrination and productive labor...

    **Given prudent precautions and regulation to ensure that they are taken.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Diss, excellent reply.

    • Thanks: Dissident
  53. Roger says:

    Wow. A couple of months ago, I would have said that the schools would never be shut down, unless there was some very convincing proof that the schools killing people somehow. Now it turns out that they may not have been spreading disease at all?!

    I am losing confidence in the authorities every day.

  54. @leterip
    @LondonBob

    I wondered the same thing.

    The typical required herd immunity number thrown around is 60% for covid. But if children can not be vectors, then the required herd immunity % would be lower - say 55%.

    And if older children are not vectors, it could be lower still. Say 45-50%.

    And if some mild suppression was kept in place, say hand washing and no large gatherings, the required herd immunity % could be even lower still.

    Replies: @LondonBob

    All countries seem to get a version of Farr’s epidemic model except the tail on the downside is long and declines only slowly. If children were the traditional vector of transmission then a virus that is this contagious would be a lot more exponential and then die out as quickly. The dramatic spikes we have seen, such as in Italy, have been tied to specific events where adults have congregated and been in close contact, like the Atalanta football match.

  55. @Dmitry
    According to Israel Health Ministry, it is possible for children to transmit the virus, but at lower rates than adults. Israel has mainly ended its lockdown from April 19, and is re-starting schools on Sunday.

    Most of the epidemic in Israel was among Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) and Bedouin sectors due to their lawlessness and lack of social distance, but which have low median age. The most infected city (Bnei Brak) in Israel, has median age below 20 - there are estimations that 38% of the city was infected with coronavirus.


    Israeli study says children carry virus, infect others, but at a lower rate

    The Health Ministry on Thursday released an epidemiological study that will be used to determine whether daycares, kindergartens and schools are given the final go ahead to open on Friday.

    The study found that children can carry and transmit the disease, but at a lower rate than adults. The authors emphasized that the findings were preliminary

    The study (Hebrew link) tracked the spread of the virus in 562 households with 2,823 total people in Bnei Brak, over half of whom were under the age of 20. Bnei Brak saw a severe outbreak of the disease last month.

    Children in households with at least one family member who had the virus were 20-50 percent less likely to get infected than adults, with younger children less likely to contract the disease than older ones, the report said.

    Children were 20%-75% less likely than adults to infect others. The chances of transmission rise with age, though those under a year can also be highly contagious, the report said.

    Infants were more susceptible to infection than other children, possibly due to closer contact with parents or breastfeeding while their mothers were infected, the report said.
     

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-says-children-carry-virus-infect-others-but-at-a-lower-rate/

    Replies: @LondonBob

    I would guess the immune system is so strong that it deals with the virus quick enough that the children don’t have an opportunity to spread the virus. So they can transmit it but in practice they don’t, we haven’t seen a great outbreak amongst teachers here in London so it isn’t likely an issue.

  56. @Alice
    @Mike Tre

    Yup, they're killing our kids.

    and let me say I Told You So. Some of us DID ask this BEFORE they closed schools, back when the CDC was saying keep them open and states weren't listening. Because how come schoolteachers weren't already in hospital?

    We were told we were death loving murderous Typhoid Marys for saying it aloud.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    Yup, they’re killing our kids.

    and let me say I Told You So. Some of us DID ask this BEFORE they closed schools, back when the CDC was saying keep them open and states weren’t listening. Because how come schoolteachers weren’t already in hospital?

    I don’t where you live, but my kids go to a small private school with a faculty of about 15. One teacher and the principal were already sick with Covid-19 (“official” cases) six weeks ago.

  57. @Polynikes
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I don't think it has to be an either/or proposition between the young vs. old. Had we taken a clear lucid look at the numbers coming out early on, we could've fairly predicted much of this. Very early numbers from Italy, while somewhat messy, were pretty clear that the old and people with co-morbidities were making up the bulk of casualties.

    Had we then taken a deep breath and took 10% of the resources expended so far and targeted them on protecting the old and weak while having everyone else follow best practices (e.g. wash hands, wear masks, avoid large crowds, etc..) we avoided most of the damage from the lockdowns and potentially even mitigated a fair amount of the damage from the virus.

    I think if you take a fair look back over the last month-plus of comments you will find some people suggesting that, even back then.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind

    Two questions.

    Some of the “hard-core” faction are claiming that the Governor of New York has been killing old people by placing persons with the Virus into nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

    The send I got from a quick Web search is not that Mr. Cuomo is visiting the Plague of Jinping on old people by stuffing Virus spreading people into care facilities, rather, he is hiding behind New York law that nursing homes cannot turn people away, “and we will grant them exceptions if they lack the facilities or PPE to properly isolate those patients.”

    Letting anyone into a nursing home with the Virus is a lame idea. What happened to setting up field hospitals for Virus cases in empty sports venues? You think that someone with the Virus, even an old person, could be sent anywhere except into a nursing home. But is Fredo’s brother rubbing his hands with glee that he can do in old people, or is he too intellectually disabled and stubborn about enforcing existing laws that make zero sense and made New York the globe’s Hot Spot?

    Second question, what did President Trump actually say about bleach or disinfectant and using it to rid your lungs of the Virus? Was it meant metaphorically, or was Mr. Trump acting as goofy as Mr. Biden? A lot of the Eyores on the Right Blogosphere, including commenters here, if I am not mistaken, are ready to invoke the 25 Amendment on this. Did it even happen, or is this yet another one of these things taken way out of context?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS