Children’s role in spread of virus bigger than thought • Hacker News Board

Re: Children’s role in spread of virus bigger than thought

#51

Post by johncearls » Sun, Aug 23, 2020, 6:23 PM UTC

lbeltrame wrote: post #44

johncearls wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the real issue here is how did they select the children. Unfortunately, I cannot find the paper. Why don't they ever link to these things? A likely restatement of this article is, "To have even mild symptoms of COVID, children need a much higher viral load than hospitalized adults." Again, I'd love to find the paper to see if my guess is right.

The paper is at: https://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(20)31023-4/fulltext

Thanks! I'll note it is exactly what I thought. This was not a random population. This is children showing symptoms bad enough to warrant going to the hospital.

Re: Children’s role in spread of virus bigger than thought

#52

Post by rurban » Sun, Aug 23, 2020, 10:09 PM UTC

Children were always thought to spread the virus like with influenza virus. That's why all schools closed.

But the problem was that kids under 10 turned out to be not affected in numbers. People still thought that it is dangerous for or with kids. Statistics worldwide didn't support that.

The picture is now a bit clearer, that kids just belong to the huge group of asymptotic cases dealing with the common cold as every year.

The potential to infect older people is still disputed. Current studies clearly dismiss that. Only the press and politicians are fascinated by that idea. The biggest COVID-19 spreaders are still young women at around 30, unlike with the influenza.

Re: Children’s role in spread of virus bigger than thought

#53

Post by rurban » Mon, Aug 24, 2020, 5:19 AM UTC

rurban wrote: post #52

Children were always thought to spread the virus like with influenza virus. That's why all schools closed. But the problem was that kids under 10 turned out to be not affected in numbers. People still thought that it is dangerous for or with kids. Statistics worldwide didn't support that. The picture is now a bit clearer, that kids just belong to the huge group of asymptotic cases dealing with the common cold as ever…

Eg https://fullfact.org/health/children-silent-super-spreaders-...

Re: Children’s role in spread of virus bigger than thought

#54

Post by sbierwagen » Mon, Aug 24, 2020, 9:12 PM UTC

fileeditview wrote: post #26

nickff wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The push to start school is based on the perceived economic necessity (arguably a cost-benefit analysis), of providing childcare for parents of children between the ages of 5 and 17.

It is very important for the development of the children to continue their education and socialize. Basically every child you ask will tell you it wants to go back to school. Making this about economics is nonsense. It increasingly baffles me how we accept all kinds of risk every day (e.g. traffic) but in the case of Corona forbid children very important parts of their childhood, while allowing all kinds of other use…

Fun fact: there's been an enormous drop in youth mortality, ~10%, over the last 6 months: https://twitter.com/lymanstoneky/status/1296868460195192832

You can say the lockdown might not be "emotionally" healthy. But it seems it has been healthy in a more literal sense.

Re: Children’s role in spread of virus bigger than thought

#55

Post by blub » Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 10:30 AM UTC

gnusty_gnurc wrote: post #42

blub wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schools and kindergartens even more are the perfect environment for spreading diseases and especially respiratory viruses. Spending multiple hours in a closed, often poorly ventilated room often without wearing masks is a recipe for disaster. You're also misinformed about the risks to young people. An unknown amount of mild courses (I've read about estimates of 10%) result in long-term damage, just like with SARS. Th…

Isn’t it misinformation to cite “an unknown amount” and then assume the worst case scenario to bolster your argument? This is the logic of an agoraphobe.

The amount is unknown because very few are studying it. The 10% comes from a German doctor which was interviewed.