Children spread covid more effectively than adults

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An Indiana school shut down the same day they reopened.

There were 80+ cases amount campers and staff in one section of a camp in Missouri.

Texas has over 1,300 cases linked to daycares.

250/600 kids who were only at camp 4 days in Georgia tested positive; the numbers will likely be higher after 2-14 days for incubation.

We KNOW kids are germ factories. We KNOW they have poor personal hygiene habits. We know they put things in their mouths and touch their faces. We know they share food and utensils, whisper in other kids’ ears and have no comprehension of personal space. We know they do impulsive, foolish, childish things... because they’re children!

NO child should be in daycare or school. NO child should be at activities. I don’t understand why this is so hard to comprehend. Even when kids are asymptomatic (especially when they’re asymptomatic!), they spread the virus everywhere.

Look a little more closely at the Texas numbers https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/07/06/health/texas-coronavirus-cases-child-care-facilities/index.html

894 staff and 441 children from 883 facilities. That’s not indicating that the kids are the main vectors. Think about how a class is set up with multiple children per adult. If the kids were spreading you would see the number of infected kids being 2-5x the number of adults and the number of impacted center being much lower than the number of cases. This looks more like the result of people contracting the virus in the community and they just happen to work/attend daycare. The studies tell us that kids have a lot of virus and are potentially contagious, but that doesn’t mean they are actually spreading effectively.

Well, someday, when we know for sure, then we can make an educated decision about what is and isn't safe.

The problem with that approach is that parents need childcare NOW. We don't need to have overnight camp or soccer leagues and I certainly don't think that sending all kids everywhere to K-12 in September is a good idea, but saying that NO child should be in daycare ignores both the realities of making a living and the actual lived experience of daycares that have been operating safely this whole time.

The approach should be financially baking parents and employers so the vast majority stay home. It also stands to reason that the reason that overall there have been few outbreaks from daycares and schools, is because there has been few people in them.

DH and I both WFH, although DH will be required to be back in the office full time in two weeks. We made the decision to send both of our kids back to daycare 2 weeks ago. Our center reopened back at the end of May. They’ve had one case - a staff member. Headcount appears to be half the usual. There are 8 kids in older DD’s class and 6 in the infant room (younger DD is 3mo).
Ideally, I would keep the kids home, as we did for the first 4 months of this. But, even with WFH, it wasn’t sustainable long-term. My hours aren’t very flexible, I’m expected to actively participate in several hours’ worth of meetings every day, and our older DD was struggling with the changes. I’m likely to be told to report back in another month or two, myself.
Grandparents are older and can’t provide long-term care. Nanny isn’t an option. We have no one to form a pod with...so here we are. Daycare it is.

You finding it difficult to work at home does not make you an essential worker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An Indiana school shut down the same day they reopened.

There were 80+ cases amount campers and staff in one section of a camp in Missouri.

Texas has over 1,300 cases linked to daycares.

250/600 kids who were only at camp 4 days in Georgia tested positive; the numbers will likely be higher after 2-14 days for incubation.

We KNOW kids are germ factories. We KNOW they have poor personal hygiene habits. We know they put things in their mouths and touch their faces. We know they share food and utensils, whisper in other kids’ ears and have no comprehension of personal space. We know they do impulsive, foolish, childish things... because they’re children!

NO child should be in daycare or school. NO child should be at activities. I don’t understand why this is so hard to comprehend. Even when kids are asymptomatic (especially when they’re asymptomatic!), they spread the virus everywhere.

Look a little more closely at the Texas numbers https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/07/06/health/texas-coronavirus-cases-child-care-facilities/index.html

894 staff and 441 children from 883 facilities. That’s not indicating that the kids are the main vectors. Think about how a class is set up with multiple children per adult. If the kids were spreading you would see the number of infected kids being 2-5x the number of adults and the number of impacted center being much lower than the number of cases. This looks more like the result of people contracting the virus in the community and they just happen to work/attend daycare. The studies tell us that kids have a lot of virus and are potentially contagious, but that doesn’t mean they are actually spreading effectively.

Well, someday, when we know for sure, then we can make an educated decision about what is and isn't safe.

The problem with that approach is that parents need childcare NOW. We don't need to have overnight camp or soccer leagues and I certainly don't think that sending all kids everywhere to K-12 in September is a good idea, but saying that NO child should be in daycare ignores both the realities of making a living and the actual lived experience of daycares that have been operating safely this whole time.

The approach should be financially baking parents and employers so the vast majority stay home. It also stands to reason that the reason that overall there have been few outbreaks from daycares and schools, is because there has been few people in them.

DP, but the bolded just is not true. Essential childcare in Maryland, for example, has been operating for five months, overwhelmingly safely. Of course there are outbreaks at camps and in daycares where *adults* in particular are not wearing masks, distancing, etc.--both at work and at home.

There absolutely are ways to provide childcare that minimize risk to children and adults. The JAMA Pediatrics study doesn't say anything about actual disease transmission; it's about viral load. Maybe kids need much higher viral loads to be symptomatic or even develop COVID, regardless of exposure to SARS-CoV2. That's another interpretation of the data, though it's as politically exciting as "kids spread the virus more than adults" (and if you think scientific publication isn't partially politically motivated, you know very little about the process).

I was not aware daycare has been running at full/normal capacity for the last 5 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Damn.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/07/31/new-evidence-suggests-young-children-spread-covid-19-more-efficiently-than-adults/

This is a perfect example of why non-scientists -- i.e., journalists -- should not attempt to interpret scientific studies. The study from Italy is a PRE-PRINT. It has not been peer reviewed. And its interpretation has some serious flaws.

For starters, they studied around 2800 people with coronavirus and performed contact tracing to determine how many of their contacts became infected. But ONLY 70% of the 2800 had laboratory confirmed covid-19. This was in March and April, also known as cold and flu season. So they start off their study by examining people who may not even have had covid!!!

Second, the people being tested at this point in time were SYMPTOMATIC. That means we're only assessing how well symptomatic cases pass on suspected covid. We already know that children tend to be asymptomatic. Asymptomatic cases are less likely to spread because the person isn't coughing, unlike symptomatic cases, who cough on average something like once per minute. In fact, the vast majority of asymptomatic cases dont shed detectable viral particles by breathing alone -- only a small percentage do, but this the reason we are covering our faces.

"The risk of developing symptoms or being found to have a positive test and thus being defined as a case increased with the age of the contact, from a low of 8.4% in contacts 0-14 years of age to
18.9% in those over 75 years." According to this same paper, young children were the least likely to become infected by a sick person. The most likely explanation is that the children were asymptomatic, and thus their cases went undetected in this study. But they were clearly less likely to develop *symptomatic* disease when in contact with an infected individual.

Combining this with what we already know, it looks like kids can and do catch covid from other kids -- but they are the age group most likely to be asymptomatic when they become infected. And asymptomatic people are less likely to spread covid to others. This explains what we are seeing on a larger scale in other studies -- fewer kids getting and passing covid to others.

Scientist here, agreed. This breathless Forbes article was an unfortunate example of irresponsible journalism, and I'm dismayed to see that it is being circulated so widely.

Agree with all of this. I also think of the reporting about the "covid can last for x days on various surfaces" study earlier this year, which I think has ultimately done more harm than good, as people focused way more energy on surfaces than they did on preventing spread by respiratory droplets. The study never said anything about the surviving particles being infectious, which was clear if you read it or read analysis by medical scientists. However, the media took it and all of a sudden people were bleaching their amazon packages.

I feel the same way about the schools issue. NO ONE is suggesting that kids can't get covid. NO ONE is suggesting that they can't spread it. Ample on-the-ground evidence suggests that they get it less and spread it less. German research has suggested that children act as a "break" on the disease. Icelandic research has documented not one case of child-adult transmission (all of the kids their got it from adults). The kids in the GA summer camp got it from a teenaged counselor(s). The number of kids infected at daycares worldwide is tiny. And yet, the media see something like this and conclude that kids are super spreaders. That is neither what the original study said, nor what the evidence on the ground says.

Are our childcare statitstic at all comparable to Germany and Iceknd an Finland? Are they likely to have 3 or 4 kids in school at the same time? I Do the have a large number of the population that is under 5? Do these things matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An Indiana school shut down the same day they reopened.

There were 80+ cases amount campers and staff in one section of a camp in Missouri.

Texas has over 1,300 cases linked to daycares.

250/600 kids who were only at camp 4 days in Georgia tested positive; the numbers will likely be higher after 2-14 days for incubation.

We KNOW kids are germ factories. We KNOW they have poor personal hygiene habits. We know they put things in their mouths and touch their faces. We know they share food and utensils, whisper in other kids’ ears and have no comprehension of personal space. We know they do impulsive, foolish, childish things... because they’re children!

NO child should be in daycare or school. NO child should be at activities. I don’t understand why this is so hard to comprehend. Even when kids are asymptomatic (especially when they’re asymptomatic!), they spread the virus everywhere.

Look a little more closely at the Texas numbers https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/07/06/health/texas-coronavirus-cases-child-care-facilities/index.html

894 staff and 441 children from 883 facilities. That’s not indicating that the kids are the main vectors. Think about how a class is set up with multiple children per adult. If the kids were spreading you would see the number of infected kids being 2-5x the number of adults and the number of impacted center being much lower than the number of cases. This looks more like the result of people contracting the virus in the community and they just happen to work/attend daycare. The studies tell us that kids have a lot of virus and are potentially contagious, but that doesn’t mean they are actually spreading effectively.

Well, someday, when we know for sure, then we can make an educated decision about what is and isn't safe.

The problem with that approach is that parents need childcare NOW. We don't need to have overnight camp or soccer leagues and I certainly don't think that sending all kids everywhere to K-12 in September is a good idea, but saying that NO child should be in daycare ignores both the realities of making a living and the actual lived experience of daycares that have been operating safely this whole time.

The approach should be financially baking parents and employers so the vast majority stay home. It also stands to reason that the reason that overall there have been few outbreaks from daycares and schools, is because there has been few people in them.

DH and I both WFH, although DH will be required to be back in the office full time in two weeks. We made the decision to send both of our kids back to daycare 2 weeks ago. Our center reopened back at the end of May. They’ve had one case - a staff member. Headcount appears to be half the usual. There are 8 kids in older DD’s class and 6 in the infant room (younger DD is 3mo).
Ideally, I would keep the kids home, as we did for the first 4 months of this. But, even with WFH, it wasn’t sustainable long-term. My hours aren’t very flexible, I’m expected to actively participate in several hours’ worth of meetings every day, and our older DD was struggling with the changes. I’m likely to be told to report back in another month or two, myself.
Grandparents are older and can’t provide long-term care. Nanny isn’t an option. We have no one to form a pod with...so here we are. Daycare it is.

You finding it difficult to work at home does not make you an essential worker.

I am the immediate PP you quoted. Where exactly did I state that I was an essential worker???
Our daycare is operating safely. I hope and pray it stays that way. It was a VERY difficult decision for us, but we made it after multiple discussions with our pediatrician, who was fully supportive of the decision, particularly in regards to the impacts on the emotional health of our older daughter.

[Anonymous]

You'll be working from home anyway or need a babysiter anyway, once a single child in your kid's class tests positive or has enough suspected symptoms and everyone is forced into quarantine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An Indiana school shut down the same day they reopened.

There were 80+ cases amount campers and staff in one section of a camp in Missouri.

Texas has over 1,300 cases linked to daycares.

250/600 kids who were only at camp 4 days in Georgia tested positive; the numbers will likely be higher after 2-14 days for incubation.

We KNOW kids are germ factories. We KNOW they have poor personal hygiene habits. We know they put things in their mouths and touch their faces. We know they share food and utensils, whisper in other kids’ ears and have no comprehension of personal space. We know they do impulsive, foolish, childish things... because they’re children!

NO child should be in daycare or school. NO child should be at activities. I don’t understand why this is so hard to comprehend. Even when kids are asymptomatic (especially when they’re asymptomatic!), they spread the virus everywhere.

Look a little more closely at the Texas numbers https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/07/06/health/texas-coronavirus-cases-child-care-facilities/index.html

894 staff and 441 children from 883 facilities. That’s not indicating that the kids are the main vectors. Think about how a class is set up with multiple children per adult. If the kids were spreading you would see the number of infected kids being 2-5x the number of adults and the number of impacted center being much lower than the number of cases. This looks more like the result of people contracting the virus in the community and they just happen to work/attend daycare. The studies tell us that kids have a lot of virus and are potentially contagious, but that doesn’t mean they are actually spreading effectively.

Those are the numbers for the people who were tested. Most kids aren’t tested unless they’re symptomatic for something (might not be covid, but it’s something). With those numbers, I don’t believe for a second that the kids aren’t taking it home to parents, neighbors, extended family, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is really awful news! I desperately want my kids back in school but not if it means killing their teachers or the lovely older women who work in the school. Or DH and me!

How odd. I'd die for my childrens' future. Why so selfish?

[Anonymous]

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/education/2020/08/05/tennessee-school-districts-reported-coronavirus-cases/3296529001/


https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/covid-cases-exposure-have-260-gwinnett-school-employees-not-working/RVZP4UFBPFHDNJJ73MNUFIKEPY/


https://www.ajc.com/education/get-schooled-blog/cherokee-reports-covid-19-cases-in-three-more-schools/V6K7XGLZXVHRTFI7E6BSXZIQAU/


https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/five-marietta-schools-employees-test-positive-for-covid-19/XGPS3DHFEVBNVG6HOEWZDFE7TE/


https://www.ajc.com/news/north-fulton-high-school-athlete-loses-both-parents-to-covid-19-days-apart/EN2GLKSBL5FDXCRBX7E7BVKHEE/


https://www.ajc.com/education/get-schooled-blog/paulding-confirms-covid-19-case-on-first-day-at-elementary-school/6TZ3XHVRKFGIDPTV32P2PLJP7A/


https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/dekalb-high-school-athletes-tests-positive-for-covid-19/FIV6WVYKBBAKJOB7O6G5HBXOTQ/


https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/06/us/iowa-teachers-coronavirus-obits-trnd/index.html


https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/05/health/ohio-church-coronavirus-spread/index.html


https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/03/us/indiana-student-covid-positive-school/index.html


https://abcnews.go.com/Health/students-school-touted-pence-reopening-quarantine-due-covid/story?id=72187266


https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/living/story/teacher-charged-2000-resigning-covid-19-concerns-launches-72169658


https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/living/story/teachers-emotional-video-shows-attempt-set-classroom-amid-72025883


https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news/video/student-suspended-showing-fellow-students-masks-72209309


https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/08/06/school-coronavirus-outbreak-mississippi/

At what point do we say enough is enough? When do we recognize that teachers aren’t being given the tools and distance required to keep themselves and their students safe?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really awful news! I desperately want my kids back in school but not if it means killing their teachers or the lovely older women who work in the school. Or DH and me!

How odd. I'd die for my childrens' future. Why so selfish?

NP. I'll bite.
Because we have no one to take care of our very young kids. Grandparents are elderly. It's just DH and me. I have no idea what to do if we both get very sick at the same time, and I certainly dont want to orphan them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really awful news! I desperately want my kids back in school but not if it means killing their teachers or the lovely older women who work in the school. Or DH and me!

How odd. I'd die for my childrens' future. Why so selfish?

NP. I'll bite.
Because we have no one to take care of our very young kids. Grandparents are elderly. It's just DH and me. I have no idea what to do if we both get very sick at the same time, and I certainly dont want to orphan them.

What posters like the person you’re responding to forget is that children will die and be disadvantaged by meeting schools closed. By almost any margin more children will suffer more greatly with schools closed than with them open. Not kids like yours or mine but abused and neglected kids 100%.

Kids needs are in direct conflict with teacher needs right now. We need to be honest about this being the issue. Teachers are scared and have been effective at communicating their fear. They are at much higher risk than the kids themselves and this is just a truth we seem to not want to grapple with. No one wants to paint it as that kind of a choice but that’s what it is. As a society do we care more about kids or teachers? And relatedly, do we care about teachers more than we care about the economy at large. Do we care more about teachers or a generation of progress in someone’s equality in the workplace being wiped out?

I’m not saying the answers up there are clear, but these are the questions. Posing it like a zero sum outcome is simply not reflective of reality and obfuscates the issue.

Personally I think teaching is an essential service and they should be paid hazard pay.

[Anonymous]

/\ women’s equality not someone’s equality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really awful news! I desperately want my kids back in school but not if it means killing their teachers or the lovely older women who work in the school. Or DH and me!

How odd. I'd die for my childrens' future. Why so selfish?

NP. I'll bite.
Because we have no one to take care of our very young kids. Grandparents are elderly. It's just DH and me. I have no idea what to do if we both get very sick at the same time, and I certainly dont want to orphan them.

What posters like the person you’re responding to forget is that children will die and be disadvantaged by meeting schools closed. By almost any margin more children will suffer more greatly with schools closed than with them open. Not kids like yours or mine but abused and neglected kids 100%.

Kids needs are in direct conflict with teacher needs right now. We need to be honest about this being the issue. Teachers are scared and have been effective at communicating their fear. They are at much higher risk than the kids themselves and this is just a truth we seem to not want to grapple with. No one wants to paint it as that kind of a choice but that’s what it is. As a society do we care more about kids or teachers? And relatedly, do we care about teachers more than we care about the economy at large. Do we care more about teachers or a generation of progress in someone’s equality in the workplace being wiped out?

I’m not saying the answers up there are clear, but these are the questions. Posing it like a zero sum outcome is simply not reflective of reality and obfuscates the issue.

Personally I think teaching is an essential service and they should be paid hazard pay.

+1

They should also be able to choose to work from home. A lot of young teachers would prefer to be in the classroom, because ALL teachers realize it’s more effective than dl. But when the choice is inadequate distancing, masks that aren’t required or don’t stay on, parents sending sick kids to school? They should have a choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really awful news! I desperately want my kids back in school but not if it means killing their teachers or the lovely older women who work in the school. Or DH and me!

How odd. I'd die for my childrens' future. Why so selfish?

NP. I'll bite.
Because we have no one to take care of our very young kids. Grandparents are elderly. It's just DH and me. I have no idea what to do if we both get very sick at the same time, and I certainly dont want to orphan them.

What posters like the person you’re responding to forget is that children will die and be disadvantaged by meeting schools closed. By almost any margin more children will suffer more greatly with schools closed than with them open. Not kids like yours or mine but abused and neglected kids 100%.

Kids needs are in direct conflict with teacher needs right now. We need to be honest about this being the issue. Teachers are scared and have been effective at communicating their fear. They are at much higher risk than the kids themselves and this is just a truth we seem to not want to grapple with. No one wants to paint it as that kind of a choice but that’s what it is. As a society do we care more about kids or teachers? And relatedly, do we care about teachers more than we care about the economy at large. Do we care more about teachers or a generation of progress in someone’s equality in the workplace being wiped out?

I’m not saying the answers up there are clear, but these are the questions. Posing it like a zero sum outcome is simply not reflective of reality and obfuscates the issue.

Personally I think teaching is an essential service and they should be paid hazard pay.

+1

They should also be able to choose to work from home. A lot of young teachers would prefer to be in the classroom, because ALL teachers realize it’s more effective than dl. But when the choice is inadequate distancing, masks that aren’t required or don’t stay on, parents sending sick kids to school? They should have a choice.

+2

Although, frankly, I think a lot of the extreme fear I’ve heard many teachers express is unfounded. They’re not intubating COVID patients in an ICU with no PPE, FFS. The available data suggest that young kids, at least, don’t contract or transmit COVID the same way older kids and adults seem to. So, these younger kids and their teachers could probably go back safely with reasonable mitigation measures (masks, hand-washing, spacing, etc.). This article sums up how I feel (even though I’m not a nurse): https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/08/im-nurse-teachers-should-do-their-jobs-like-i-did/614902/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand and read the article, but I do not understand how both the article’s takeaway and the 5 months of data we’ve seen about this can be true. Most countries have kept schools open and have found that schools and childcare settings do NOT lead to outbreaks. Iceland has reported no child to adult transmission. So, how can this new evidence be reconciled with the facts on the ground?

Read the actual studies pointed to by the article, rather than the article itself. One was really badly done in that it lumped children aged 5-17 together and reporting the findings based on that. And the other has not been peer reviewed.

And what’s your criticism of this study by the American Medical Association which says the same thing?

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2768952

Your article, right up front, states:
Children drive spread of respiratory and gastrointestinal illnesses in the population,2 but data on children as sources of SARS-CoV-2 spread are sparse.

New poster here. That statement is in the paper introduction, where they give the rationale for doing the study. Their study is part of building that collection of data. Read the results section. Of course data is sparse on a novel type of coronavirus, but that is not this study's results.

-scientist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really awful news! I desperately want my kids back in school but not if it means killing their teachers or the lovely older women who work in the school. Or DH and me!

How odd. I'd die for my childrens' future. Why so selfish?

NP. I'll bite.
Because we have no one to take care of our very young kids. Grandparents are elderly. It's just DH and me. I have no idea what to do if we both get very sick at the same time, and I certainly dont want to orphan them.

What posters like the person you’re responding to forget is that children will die and be disadvantaged by meeting schools closed. By almost any margin more children will suffer more greatly with schools closed than with them open. Not kids like yours or mine but abused and neglected kids 100%.

Kids needs are in direct conflict with teacher needs right now. We need to be honest about this being the issue. Teachers are scared and have been effective at communicating their fear. They are at much higher risk than the kids themselves and this is just a truth we seem to not want to grapple with. No one wants to paint it as that kind of a choice but that’s what it is. As a society do we care more about kids or teachers? And relatedly, do we care about teachers more than we care about the economy at large. Do we care more about teachers or a generation of progress in someone’s equality in the workplace being wiped out?

I’m not saying the answers up there are clear, but these are the questions. Posing it like a zero sum outcome is simply not reflective of reality and obfuscates the issue.

Personally I think teaching is an essential service and they should be paid hazard pay.

+1

They should also be able to choose to work from home. A lot of young teachers would prefer to be in the classroom, because ALL teachers realize it’s more effective than dl. But when the choice is inadequate distancing, masks that aren’t required or don’t stay on, parents sending sick kids to school? They should have a choice.

+2

Although, frankly, I think a lot of the extreme fear I’ve heard many teachers express is unfounded. They’re not intubating COVID patients in an ICU with no PPE, FFS. The available data suggest that young kids, at least, don’t contract or transmit COVID the same way older kids and adults seem to. So, these younger kids and their teachers could probably go back safely with reasonable mitigation measures (masks, hand-washing, spacing, etc.). This article sums up how I feel (even though I’m not a nurse): https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/08/im-nurse-teachers-should-do-their-jobs-like-i-did/614902/

I don't think this is true. The data is largely inconclusive. Remember, most countries shutdown schools for a while, so we don't have enough info on this. Even Birx indicated as much.


https://www.today.com/health/dr-deborah-birx-still-open-question-how-rapidly-children-under-t187702

July 24, 2020

"What I can't tell you for sure despite the South Korea study is whether children under 10 in the United States don't spread the virus the same as children over 10.

"I think that is still an open question that needs to be studied in the United States. We certainly know from other studies that children under 10 do get infected, it's just unclear how rapidly they spread the virus."