Children are not super spreaders, but answer me this...

[Happymind]

We can contract Covid 19 from objects so must take precautions... but not so much from children?

And children can go to school and be in contact with teachers, as they're not "super spreaders" but can not be around family members or grandparents outside their household?

The UK are following guidance from other countries regarding sending children back to school. They are reassured that there will be little or no covid outbreaks judging by other countries success. Yet the UK appear to be the only ones not providing PPE for students and staff?

Am I missing something?

Sometimeswinning
Why didn't teachers protest when they had to look after key workers children?

Because they/we were under the same restrictions as the other keyworkers.

No contact, social distancing, hand washing etc.

@incrediblysadtoo They can't do right for doing wrong can they. Can you imagine they uproar if they just threw all the kids back in as normal and gave staff PPE (masks?!) People would be kicking off left right and centre. Of course they need guidelines they are trying to reassure you the public by controlling the risk of spread in case the risk is there!

Upthewolves - no real question, just that their logic makes no sense. How can you say that children are not super spreaders, yet we must be careful of possible contaminated objects .

How can we follow the lead of other countries that have sent children back to school, and claim it is safe, yet we fail to provide the one thing that may be a key reason why covid isn't causing outbreaks in these schools... PPE!

I thought my OP was quite clear.

The biggest risk to my child when he returns to school is people who are continuing to visit family indoors.

It's probably having a fall.

I also don't understand if the advice is that children can't/don't/won't spread it, why all the precautions and social distancing measures in school? I guess the truth is no one actually knows how well/badly this could go, so they're guessing the best course of action. It seems risky, but I understand what they're doing, trying to get the country back on its feet, parents back to work etc. Just funny how the government haven't tried to make the return to school mandatory. To me that speaks volumes about even their reservations about this...

Yes you certainly are missing something. The evidenece is growing that children are low risk and should be back in school
adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/early/2020/05/05/archdischild-2020-319474.full.pdf
Australia have done some research recently. PPE in schools is neither use nor ornament. The Unions claim there is no evidence, this is not true. Teachers are more at risk from each other than the children and so should take care, If there was a risk, I bekieve that children of health workers on the front line would have bee the most likely to have a risk and those who have stayed at school have been ok.
I am tired of poster banging on about being lied to but not researching properly to find the truth.
This is more about the Unions flexing their muscle than the safety of children ot teachers

@FrippEnos not the same as me. Social distancing is impossible in my job. Handwashing and hygiene is not always within my clients abilities. But it's been the norm for me so I do empathise that its unknown to teachers.

Not making return to school mandatory does not speak volumes at all about reservations, but a lot about parental freedom to make an informed choice. No definite plan is in place yet, just an outline aim to give schools time to make preparations

Because there is evidence, scientific evidence (that no one has ever seen despite many requests to let people see it) that children don't pass it on to adults. Mind you these are the same scientists who said care homes were safe. So I trust them completely.
As for transmission I am concerned about passing it on to the 14-17 year olds I might soon be teaching. Who are really not kid sized and probably transmit like adults. And my DD is on a Covid ward, comes home and I then go into school with students. Would you rather I wear a mask or not if they were your kids ?

How can we follow the lead of other countries that have sent children back to school, and claim it is safe, yet we fail to provide the one thing that may be a key reason why covid isn't causing outbreaks in these schools... PPE!
Staggering logic! Its nothing to do with PPE

I was just saying this to dh. We're in Melbourne and school's going back soon but I can't work out why it's not safe for dh to be back in the office but dd1 can go back to school.

Because it isn’t all or nothing. It’s about reducing the overall number of contacts at a population level. What different countries prioritise will be different. However, principles are likely to be similar - ease of contact tracing, for example, and consistency of contacts. So from a purely tracing and containment point of view, a school practising social distancing between (but not within) defined groups is probably preferable to a daily public transport commute that can be avoided by WFH.

That’s before you get to which groups and activities you prioritise. For some countries, prioritising the needs of children over others will be culturally a no brainier (from what I’ve heard in the Netherlands the narrative there is more child-focused than in the UK or Australia where I’m from originally and where all my family are); for others there will be a different balance.

School is necessary on a societal level, visiting elderly relatives is not.

You don't throw out all the rules just because some are being loosened.

My DH works in food retail so he's been in contact with hundreds of people throughout. Is it okay for him to go to a party with hundreds of people? Of course not.

You're quite right, it would be crazy to allow the fact that they are not super spreaders of this disease to get in the way of the Big Dream of a child-free society.

But there is no real evidence that they are not able to spread the disease in the same way as adults. there were some signs that this may be the case but even the scientific evidence provided by the Government to support their reopening of schools says there is LOW confidence in these findings.

@mumsneedwine
see my link above from the BMJ article high credibility research
It IS out there and growing all the time as we learn more

I don't think any of the European countries that are re-opening schools are requiring PPE. We are not here in Germany.

But it's the children that would need masks rather than the teachers. If the children wear masks it will protect the teachers but if the teachers wear the masks it won't really protect them.
Surely the teachers are more at risk of catching the virus and being seriously ill or dying than the children?

Can we catch it from objects?

I thought that they'd proved the virus could live on objects, but not that there was enough virus to necessarily be infectious?

Once again the sound bite. It is now in the public lexicon thanks to Keir Starmer that nursing homes were safe. That was a clever misuse at the point when we were in the first phase of the virus and community spread was not top of the priority list, . This is pure Politics. Yes we have made mistakes as all countries have and it will all come out in the end analysis. If we all sink to the lowest common denominator and Cry LIE at every junction, what posssible chance have we got.? Stop informing yourself with social media and do some proper homework

This is a good graphic that I think helps answer the OP's question:

www.statista.com/chart/21198/effect-of-social-distancing-signer-lab/

It shows the difference between normal behaviour, 50% less contact, 75% less contact.

Even 50% less contact reduces the number of people that one person infects after 30 days from 406 people to 15 people.

In other words, it is not about keeping everyone locked up long-term. Even reducing social contact by 50% will have a dramatic impact on transmission.

But there is no real evidence that they are not able to spread the disease in the same way as adults.

There is SOME evidence, and it is quite real. It's just not conclusive.

HOWEVER there is significant evidence that they are not super spreaders.

Remember when everyone was wanging on endlessly that THIS IS NOT THE FLU?

Well this is one of the ways that it is not the flu. Children ARE superspreaders of flu, which affects how it is treated in terms of public health measures.

The models that suggested shutting schools were built using models that treated Coronavirus as thought it spread like the flu. Now we know that it doesn't.

Therefore the benefit from closing schools is small and is outweighed by the risks of leaving them closed for long periods.

Hence we open schools.

Or we act like dumb idiots who have learnt nothing about this virus since December and insist that children have to stay indoors forever.

No child is known to have passed COVID-19 on to an adult, a review of evidence from around the world has found.

news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-child-known-to-have-passed-covid-19-to-adults-global-study-finds-11981111

Although when you read the article, they mean child under 10.

Children can see ONE member of their own family - ie an under 60 healthy grandparent. However, that use be in a 1:1 situation, outside and from a 2m distance.

Children can see 15 other children and as many teachers (again who could be the same age as their grandparent) as need be in a group situation indoors and without the need for any social distancing.

Where is the logic, really?

What makes that 50+ year old grandparent any different to a 50+ year old teacher?

Bahaa- I'm using my brain!! My children haven't mixed for 2 months. My mum and dad (60's and healthy and active), haven't mixed. Government says we can't see them. However my children may return to school where apparently the risk is less??

There is simply no logic there.

If the government truly trust us to rely on our common sense, then surely an educated guess says if schools can open then in fact it IS ok to see healthy fit family members.

And regardless of the chances of children being badly affected by covid, teachers have to go to school every day mixing with children from 15 different households with whom the teacher has absolutely no idea if their families have complied with social distancing etc.

If the goal is to reduce contact by 50% then surely you re-open schools, which are vital for any society, but keep restrictions on visiting friends and relatives, keep playspaces and pools closed, limit unnecessary social contact, etc.

It's about prioritising what goes into that 50%.