"Children May Be Driving the Pandemic After All" - der Spiegel (kids "quite efficient at spreading")

[Anonymous]

New on the COVID-19 Front Lines
Children May Be Driving the Pandemic After All
A large study from Austria shows that SARS-CoV-2 infects just as many schoolchildren as it does teachers. Other surveys indicate that while young children may show no symptoms, they are quite efficient at spreading the virus.
By Rafaela von Bredow

https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/new-on-the-covid-19-front-lines-children-may-be-driving-the-pandemic-after-all-a-95e4c0e7-2ea0-479b-ac27-d17f07d147a5

Germany thinks its issues may be because of schools:

Such "community transmission" has become quite high in many parts of Germany and the effect of the current "lockdown light" has been disappointingly minimal. Case numbers have stagnated at a high level, while in some regions they have continued climbing at an alarming rate. What are the reasons? Where are people contracting the infections? Is transmission only occurring in shops, which have remained open this fall in contrast to the spring lockdown? Or is transmission actually transpiring in schools, after all?

Because of the persistently high number of cases, the National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina has this week called for a strict lockdown before Christmas – including the closure of schools as quickly as possible. Chancellor Angela Merkel likewise pleaded with the state governors to send children into the Christmas break early and extend the holidays.

[Anonymous]

Sigh. Some of us scientists have been telling you this for months. The reason is that children transmit the virus yet are often asymptomatic, and therefore exposures are not caught in time to stop community spread. Schools are accelerators of viral spread. Since children are not at high risk of Covid complications, hospitalizations and deaths caused by school spread occur among the most vulnerable among us in the community, outside of the school.

[Anonymous]

I've been posting about this for months. Constant 'well Europe doesn't think so obviously because schools are open'. Guess what idiots? There's a reason why they had a huge surge in the fall right as schools re-opened and the U.S. got a 1 million kids infected with Covid in the summer alone when states opened back up alongside summer camps, daycares, and playdates.

Doesn't take a genius to figure this out. But nice to have scientific studies to back it up.

[Anonymous]

Wow, imagine that.

Very young children, meanwhile, have also long flown below the radar, even if Berlin virologist Christian Drosten discovered back in spring that they aren't immune to SARS-CoV-2 either. His tests found a viral load in the throats of young children that was similar to other age groups. The German tabloid Bild blasted his findings as "grossly inaccurate," an appraisal for which the paper was reprimanded by the German Press Council for its disparagement of the study. Drosten, as it turns out, was right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. Some of us scientists have been telling you this for months. The reason is that children transmit the virus yet are often asymptomatic, and therefore exposures are not caught in time to stop community spread. Schools are accelerators of viral spread. Since children are not at high risk of Covid complications, hospitalizations and deaths caused by school spread occur among the most vulnerable among us in the community, outside of the school.

Except a lot scientists and public health experts haven't been saying that, and still aren't. Young children- particularly those in elementary school and daycare, do not seem to substantial sources of community spread. Older kids may be a different story, but not the <10 crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, imagine that.

Very young children, meanwhile, have also long flown below the radar, even if Berlin virologist Christian Drosten discovered back in spring that they aren't immune to SARS-CoV-2 either. His tests found a viral load in the throats of young children that was similar to other age groups. The German tabloid Bild blasted his findings as "grossly inaccurate," an appraisal for which the paper was reprimanded by the German Press Council for its disparagement of the study. Drosten, as it turns out, was right.

Viral load=/=spread.

Also, if that's the study I think it, they introduced substantial selection bias by looking only at kids who sought medical attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. Some of us scientists have been telling you this for months. The reason is that children transmit the virus yet are often asymptomatic, and therefore exposures are not caught in time to stop community spread. Schools are accelerators of viral spread. Since children are not at high risk of Covid complications, hospitalizations and deaths caused by school spread occur among the most vulnerable among us in the community, outside of the school.

Except a lot scientists and public health experts haven't been saying that, and still aren't. Young children- particularly those in elementary school and daycare, do not seem to substantial sources of community spread. Older kids may be a different story, but not the <10 crowd.

This has been a known thing for months. MONTHS. The fact that you all want to ignore it when young children especially are a impact threat is ridiculous. Because young children are often asymptomatic, that makes them extremely effective carriers of the virus. They don't die off like the older population and they are not isolated and hospitalized like individuals in teens to adults age group. They spread viruses so easily. Even parents noted at the pandemic that when their kids were at home with them during the shutdown they spent weeks without being sick, unlike a regular year when the kids were in school or later in the summer where the kids met back up with friends + playdates in bubbles.

Children infected with COVID-19 have a higher level of virus in their airways than adults hospitalized with the illness, according to a new study by Massachusetts General Hospital and Mass General Hospital for Children.

The study indicates children may have a larger role in the community spread of COVID-19 than originally thought.

https://www.nhregister.com/news/coronavirus/article/Silent-carrier-Study-shows-kids-could-pose-15512067.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, imagine that.

Very young children, meanwhile, have also long flown below the radar, even if Berlin virologist Christian Drosten discovered back in spring that they aren't immune to SARS-CoV-2 either. His tests found a viral load in the throats of young children that was similar to other age groups. The German tabloid Bild blasted his findings as "grossly inaccurate," an appraisal for which the paper was reprimanded by the German Press Council for its disparagement of the study. Drosten, as it turns out, was right.

Bild is the German version of the NY Post. It’s the Murdoch press of Germany.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, imagine that.

Very young children, meanwhile, have also long flown below the radar, even if Berlin virologist Christian Drosten discovered back in spring that they aren't immune to SARS-CoV-2 either. His tests found a viral load in the throats of young children that was similar to other age groups. The German tabloid Bild blasted his findings as "grossly inaccurate," an appraisal for which the paper was reprimanded by the German Press Council for its disparagement of the study. Drosten, as it turns out, was right.

Bild is the German version of the NY Post. It’s the Murdoch press of Germany.

And they were wrong to discount a scientists study and research probing children are spreading SARS-COV-2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, imagine that.

Very young children, meanwhile, have also long flown below the radar, even if Berlin virologist Christian Drosten discovered back in spring that they aren't immune to SARS-CoV-2 either. His tests found a viral load in the throats of young children that was similar to other age groups. The German tabloid Bild blasted his findings as "grossly inaccurate," an appraisal for which the paper was reprimanded by the German Press Council for its disparagement of the study. Drosten, as it turns out, was right.

Bild is the German version of the NY Post. It’s the Murdoch press of Germany.

And they were wrong to discount a scientists study and research probing children are spreading SARS-COV-2.

Yes.
And it’s anything like the Murdoch press in the US, it’s not that they were merely “wrong”.
They were intentionally lying to advance their own political agenda.

I mean in the US, Murdoch canceled his own birthday party in February for fear of COVID. Then he used Fox to lie nonstop about COVID, getting really hundreds of thousands killed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. Some of us scientists have been telling you this for months. The reason is that children transmit the virus yet are often asymptomatic, and therefore exposures are not caught in time to stop community spread. Schools are accelerators of viral spread. Since children are not at high risk of Covid complications, hospitalizations and deaths caused by school spread occur among the most vulnerable among us in the community, outside of the school.

Except a lot scientists and public health experts haven't been saying that, and still aren't. Young children- particularly those in elementary school and daycare, do not seem to substantial sources of community spread. Older kids may be a different story, but not the <10 crowd.

This has been a known thing for months. MONTHS. The fact that you all want to ignore it when young children especially are a impact threat is ridiculous. Because young children are often asymptomatic, that makes them extremely effective carriers of the virus. They don't die off like the older population and they are not isolated and hospitalized like individuals in teens to adults age group. They spread viruses so easily. Even parents noted at the pandemic that when their kids were at home with them during the shutdown they spent weeks without being sick, unlike a regular year when the kids were in school or later in the summer where the kids met back up with friends + playdates in bubbles.

Children infected with COVID-19 have a higher level of virus in their airways than adults hospitalized with the illness, according to a new study by Massachusetts General Hospital and Mass General Hospital for Children.

The study indicates children may have a larger role in the community spread of COVID-19 than originally thought.

https://www.nhregister.com/news/coronavirus/article/Silent-carrier-Study-shows-kids-could-pose-15512067.php

Again, viral load studies are nearly worthless. First, as I said above, they all suffer from severe selection bias because they're only looking at kids who got sick enough to seek medical attention. And two, they don't measure spread/transmission. The studies that did look at transmission concluded kids younger than 10 are less likely to pick up/transmit the virus. That is not controversial, and you'd know that if you read more than just headlines from mass media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. Some of us scientists have been telling you this for months. The reason is that children transmit the virus yet are often asymptomatic, and therefore exposures are not caught in time to stop community spread. Schools are accelerators of viral spread. Since children are not at high risk of Covid complications, hospitalizations and deaths caused by school spread occur among the most vulnerable among us in the community, outside of the school.

Except a lot scientists and public health experts haven't been saying that, and still aren't. Young children- particularly those in elementary school and daycare, do not seem to substantial sources of community spread. Older kids may be a different story, but not the <10 crowd.

This has been a known thing for months. MONTHS. The fact that you all want to ignore it when young children especially are a impact threat is ridiculous. Because young children are often asymptomatic, that makes them extremely effective carriers of the virus. They don't die off like the older population and they are not isolated and hospitalized like individuals in teens to adults age group. They spread viruses so easily. Even parents noted at the pandemic that when their kids were at home with them during the shutdown they spent weeks without being sick, unlike a regular year when the kids were in school or later in the summer where the kids met back up with friends + playdates in bubbles.

Children infected with COVID-19 have a higher level of virus in their airways than adults hospitalized with the illness, according to a new study by Massachusetts General Hospital and Mass General Hospital for Children.

The study indicates children may have a larger role in the community spread of COVID-19 than originally thought.

https://www.nhregister.com/news/coronavirus/article/Silent-carrier-Study-shows-kids-could-pose-15512067.php

Again, viral load studies are nearly worthless. First, as I said above, they all suffer from severe selection bias because they're only looking at kids who got sick enough to seek medical attention. And two, they don't measure spread/transmission. The studies that did look at transmission concluded kids younger than 10 are less likely to pick up/transmit the virus. That is not controversial, and you'd know that if you read more than just headlines from mass media.

Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sigh. Some of us scientists have been telling you this for months. The reason is that children transmit the virus yet are often asymptomatic, and therefore exposures are not caught in time to stop community spread. Schools are accelerators of viral spread. Since children are not at high risk of Covid complications, hospitalizations and deaths caused by school spread occur among the most vulnerable among us in the community, outside of the school.

Except a lot scientists and public health experts haven't been saying that, and still aren't. Young children- particularly those in elementary school and daycare, do not seem to substantial sources of community spread. Older kids may be a different story, but not the <10 crowd.

This has been a known thing for months. MONTHS. The fact that you all want to ignore it when young children especially are a impact threat is ridiculous. Because young children are often asymptomatic, that makes them extremely effective carriers of the virus. They don't die off like the older population and they are not isolated and hospitalized like individuals in teens to adults age group. They spread viruses so easily. Even parents noted at the pandemic that when their kids were at home with them during the shutdown they spent weeks without being sick, unlike a regular year when the kids were in school or later in the summer where the kids met back up with friends + playdates in bubbles.

Children infected with COVID-19 have a higher level of virus in their airways than adults hospitalized with the illness, according to a new study by Massachusetts General Hospital and Mass General Hospital for Children.

The study indicates children may have a larger role in the community spread of COVID-19 than originally thought.

https://www.nhregister.com/news/coronavirus/article/Silent-carrier-Study-shows-kids-could-pose-15512067.php

Again, viral load studies are nearly worthless. First, as I said above, they all suffer from severe selection bias because they're only looking at kids who got sick enough to seek medical attention. And two, they don't measure spread/transmission. The studies that did look at transmission concluded kids younger than 10 are less likely to pick up/transmit the virus. That is not controversial, and you'd know that if you read more than just headlines from mass media.

Link?

This NYT article describes several such studies in a fairly balanced way. It should work pretty well as a starting point:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/20/parenting/coronavirus-children-spread-covid-19.html

[Anonymous]

So - the use of masks and distancing - as is being in done in controlled classroom settings, should greatly lessen the spread.

Anti- school folks keep posting these threads about kids as potential vectors. Okay. The next step should have been (months ago) to ensure controlled classroom settings to get kids back inside the classroom.

We are all going to get Covid at some point (if we have not already). Let's talk about ways to protect the most vulnerable and live with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So - the use of masks and distancing - as is being in done in controlled classroom settings, should greatly lessen the spread.

Anti- school folks keep posting these threads about kids as potential vectors. Okay. The next step should have been (months ago) to ensure controlled classroom settings to get kids back inside the classroom.

We are all going to get Covid at some point (if we have not already). Let's talk about ways to protect the most vulnerable and live with it.

No, this information means that we should avoid indoor congregate settings that accelerate the pandemic and put further strain on the healthcare system. Not that we should push to open schools at the height of the pandemic where 3,000 people are dying a day and we have 200,000+ new infections every day.