Another study on (lack of) transmission and (lack of) severity among children

1,868 Views | 13 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by RGV AG
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
From Greece. Peer reviewed and published.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.26394

Quote:

Results

There were 109 household members (66 adults and 43 children). The median attack rate per cluster was 60% (range: 33.4%100%). An adult member with COVID19 was the first case in 21 (91.3%) clusters. Transmission of infection occurred from an adult to a child in 19 clusters and/or from an adult to another adult in 12 clusters. There was no evidence of child to adult or child to child transmission. In total 68 household members (62.4%) tested positive. Children were more likely to have an asymptomatic SARSCoV2 infection compared to adults (40% versus 10.5%, pvalue=0.021). In contrast, adults were more likely to develop a severe clinical course compared to children (8.8% versus 0%, pvalue=0.021). In addition, infected children were significantly more likely to have a low viral load while adults were more likely to have a moderate viral load (40.7% and 18.5% versus 13.8% and 51.7%, respectively; pvalue=0.016).

Conclusions

While children become infected by SARSCoV2, they do not appear to transmit infection to others. Furthermore, children more frequently have an asymptomatic or mild course compared to adults. Further studies are needed to elucidate the role of viral load on these findings.

amercer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But 197,000 kids in the us tested positive in the last two weeks.....

I do think we will get decent numbers out of the school systems that are opening now, and that they will confirm that kids are low risk.

I also think the only numbers that will be reported are how many kids test positive.
NASAg03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hard to have real US studies when they close schools because of 9 positive tests, with no mention of actual symptoms or family transmission.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
RulesForTheeNotForMe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Is the concern for in-person school supposed to be about protecting the kids or the teachers?

Because if it's for the kids, then they are never going back to school ever again, the Flu is orders of magnitude more deadly to these kids and they never shut it down. Is that the next narrative that comes out?
fightingfarmer09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Abbot already said they would consider flu outbreaks and their impact on hospital capacity in potential school restrictions.

So we could see Covid restrictions if flu is bad.
fightingfarmer09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
deadbq03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RulesForTheNotForMe said:

Is the concern for in-person school supposed to be about protecting the kids or the teachers?

Because if it's for the kids, then they are never going back to school ever again, the Flu is orders of magnitude more deadly to these kids and they never shut it down. Is that the next narrative that comes out?
I don't think the major concern was ever really about the kids themselves getting it. I'm not on social media so I wouldn't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's fear-mongering about kids getting sick, but that's not what any thinking person ought to be concerned about.

And as awful as it'd be for the school system if teachers got exposed, that's not the main reason either.

The biggest overall societal risk is about kids theoretically spreading it amongst themselves at school and then taking home to their parents who may be overweight, diabetic, wrong blood type (?), etc and therefore would end up getting hospitalized with a severe case.

. . .

So if there's hard evidence that kids don't spread it, that'd be a very good thing.

In my opinion, single case studies like this aren't hard evidence that you can apply universally to other populations. There are a lot of factors at play. Do Greek kids have rampant childhood obesity like we do in the US? I doubt it. Do Greek kids have a growing population that never got vaccinated like we do in the US? I doubt it.

For me, the Georgia camp study seems more relevant to what might happen with TX kids than a study anywhere in Europe is - but of course, I'd be dishonest if I didn't also admit that the Georgia study too is also a limited on a single population group, and in a context that is highly unnatural (kids sleeping in large groups in cabins), so it too should be taken with a grain of salt.
Drip99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/over-800-students-staff-now-134300235.html

Over-reaction or is this how its going to be for the foreseeable future?
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's insanity. You cannot shut things down and quarantine healthy people based on possible exposures.
Drip99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well it looks like they can and they are. This is what i was afraid of, every positive instance is going to cause chaos.
beerad12man
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's what happens when you spread/promote fear. It leads to illogical decision making. We are in a tough spot. Not because of the virus. But because of the insane overreactions to the virus.
Duncan Idaho
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Keegan99 said:

quarantine healthy people based on possible exposures.


You do realize that is pretty much the textbook definition of quarantining and why it was invented.

Beat40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Duncan Idaho said:

Keegan99 said:

quarantine healthy people based on possible exposures.


You do realize that is pretty much the textbook definition of quarantining and why it was invented.




The healthy people part is not part of the definition. Part of the definition is for exposure though.
Duncan Idaho
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Beat40 said:

Duncan Idaho said:

Keegan99 said:

quarantine healthy people based on possible exposures.


You do realize that is pretty much the textbook definition of quarantining and why it was invented.




The healthy people part is not part of the definition. Part of the definition is for exposure though.


Quarantine is what it is called when you keep healthy appearing people (that includes healthy, nonsymptomatic, and asymptomatic people that you are not able to confirm that they ARE infected) apart from the population due to possible or known exposure.



Isolation is what it is called when you keep KNOWN sick people apart from the general population.

They are different things for different reasons.
RGV AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Keegan99 said:

It's insanity. You cannot shut things down and quarantine healthy people based on possible exposures.
That is absolutely right. Sadly it is what is being done and what is planned to do.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.