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?

By 'real' I meant confidently agreed by scientists.
As said, there is some evidence but even the Government scientist advisors have low confidence in the findings.
When questioned on this, they agreed that they just didn't know and that there was a possible risk.

Aragog suggest you watch this.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/health-52695995/children-seem-less-capable-of-spreading-virus

Construction sites are reopening with SD measures.

Many never closed
There is no SD on any of the 10 I see daily. The funny thing was watching Tesco make them and the army line up 2 m apart to go in after they walked up in a large close group.

@dreamingbohemian

Great link thanks, simple and logical

I can't understand why my GC's reception teacher can be in school with 15 children but can't see her own GC. Maybe she should get him enrolled at her school?

@Aragog

I have linked earlier to the BMJ article in the Arch. Dis Children
High credibility

School is necessary on a societal level, visiting elderly relatives is not. Apart from the people who can't go back to work as grandparents were there childcare either fulltime or before/after school.

Many countries did an excellent job of contract tracing, South Korea for example. They could find not one single case of a child passing the disease to an adult.

We cannot keep the world locked up for years to come. The reality is if you are 50 or under with no major underlying conditions you will be fine. Even if you do have underlying conditions and are over 50, the chances are you will be fine. If you are obese/have heart disease/diabetes in any of the age groups you should shield yourself more.

It's all a bit Pride and Prejudice with the level of deliberate misunderstanding that goes on around this issue.

@aragog nothing makes them differently OBVIOUSLY. Just an obtuse question.

But children aren't being educated by their 60 year old grandparents are they?!

We need them to be seeing their teachers because those are the ones in the schools able to provide an education.

You can make your own choice as a family. But there are many many children without nice grandparents they would rather see, without nice parents teaching them at home, in dire circumstances, for whom school is a haven.

It is a societal decision.

Oh Ive seen and read all of that, plus the guidance and the reasonings.

The reality is they are returning the youngest children back to school first for one main reason - to enable parents to return to work or make it easier for them to work from home. The younger the child, the harder it is for parents to work from home.

Hence why it is deemed safe for a 50 year old adult to spend several hours indoors, without social distancing, with 25 young children but that same person can only see their own grandchild if they are on their own (without their parent), outdoors and from 2m away.

@1forsorrow well there isn't much to be done about those individual circumstances. We can't solve every problem for everyone.

Let's start with offering some kids who need it an education eh?

NoMorePoliticsPlease The low confidence statement is directly out of the English Government's scientific findings for why they are reopening English schools. Hence I referred to that document.

No op, there is a huge difference in return to school risk and the full social mixing with families risk. There have been links given in this thread that will inform you, If you read them all you will understand.
I would have some concern if the teachers were over 70 but not many of them about,. There is growing awareness that people behave very differently in normal intergeneration social contact than controlled situation lie a school

@NoMorePoliticsPlease If we all sink to the lowest common denominator and Cry LIE at every junction, what posssible chance have we got.? I think people would stop crying LIE if politicians didn't lie. Why can't they just admit they got things wrong? It would be a miracle if they got everything right but they just can't admit anything.

Oh there is no misunderstanding. We can pretend the Government suddenly care greatly for the education of 5 year olds, but the reality is their main concern is to enable their parents to work.

Obviously teachings staff and schools are concerned. It would be far more worrying if they weren't concerned tbh.

Regardless of all this - most of the teachers, TAs, lunch time assistants, etc will all be back in school doing their very best to support those young children, caring for them and entertaining them in 2 -3 week's time. Some staff won't be returning - those who are shielded and those who are clinically vulnerable won't be back if they have empathetic leaders - as it is not yet safe for them to do so. Hopefully those staff members won't still be criticised by the media, etc as work shy and lazy, but I doubt it.

@upthewolves going by picking up my GC from primary school I'd say reopening schools so parents can get back to work isn't going to work unless all employers let parents go part time.

@Aragog
Thank you, I understand what you were saying. Its just that we should all educate ourselves with good research as and when it appears. Politicians also are learning on the wing as are doctors, hence to new thinking about blood clots in lungs, low blood oxygen, and whether or not some people might do ok without ventilation. I for one would hate to have to work in the way the government is being forced to do. Talk about baptism by fire

And, even despite the risk, those same teaching and school staff will be treating those child as normal - there will be contact. If a child is upset, there will be hugs, etc. There won't be social disarming as it just isn't possible. Most primary schools, especially in the younger years, are very tactile environments, especially in Uk schools. we don't implement a hands off approach.

It's about limiting the spread, as pp have very reasonably explained.
You can make your own decisions about whether to see a healthy 60 year old relative, as can we all.
If you are a teacher who is particularly at risk for some reason, then that's a seperate matter, but a lot of people have been continuing to work throughout and I haven't heard anything like the level of outrage about it! (supermarket workers, binmen, food takeaway workers, transport workers etc etc etc)
We still won't be "back to normal" when schools eventually go back but we will be continuing to limit the spread where we can.
I don't think it's that hard to grasp really?

Interestingly two doctor friends of mine, one who is a lead in the area for CV, is not sending her children back to school just yet. They've not been throughout this and the one who is eligible is going to be staying at home too.

I stuck this on antithetical thread but it also makes sense here.

Nearly everyone agrees that coming out of lockdown needs to be gradual and managed. That means you get to do some stuff but not other stuff. The government have to think “what stuff is the highest priority and the lowest risk. so do kind of see where the government are coming from in sending schools back but not seeing (on average) elderly relatives. Kids are low(er) risk than adults. They need socialisation with other children and education (high priority)So children should be allowed to mix with other children as this means only low(er) risk individuals mixing and provides socialisation.

The issue is kids need supervision. On a population level this is easier to monitor and arrange if kids go back to school than if people make their own arrangements to meet up. Most person to person contact occurs from prolonged face to face contact inside (and potentially between adults more than children) If two kids meet for a play date then that’s two adults also meeting and unless it only happens in good weather it will be inside a house increasing risk to transmission to other people who live their. For a “bubble” of kids to Socialse that means at least 15 adults have also met, and people would probably meet more than one kid so likely many more. Also kids with vulnerable parents wouldn’t be able to do this. And with grandparents on a population level they are more likely to be high risk and much more likely to want to kiss and cuddle than teachers - I know eyfs teachers hug kids normally but probably not as much as grandparents do!

If drop off and pick up at school is handled well then then 15 kids get to socialise and be educated without any adult to adult contact and only one adult exposed to the children. So on a population level many less people have been potentially exposed, and government have to focus on the whole population. On an individual level It doesn't seem to make so much sense but when looked at for the whole population it does.

If as pp said you need to remove 50% of your contacts to cut transmission then sadly it’s got to be the fun social stuff that is cut. Adults need to work to feed us and keep the country going and kids need to be socialised and educated so they grow up to be functional adults of the future to care for us when we’re old. Government policy can’t afford to get sentimental over kids not spending time with granny or their best mate whose in another bubble, they have bigger things to worry about such as keeping the majority of the population alive, fed, housed cared for if unable to care for themselves, safe from crime and the adults of the future (children) educated so that the nation continues.

Aragog and research shows the risk of teacher getting it from child is lower than from an adult.

If child gets it from a teacher there is a good chance they will be asymptomatic.

And also a good chance said child won't pass it to family.

And if teacher test positive then bubble will be shut down and everyone within that bubble will isolate. Hopefully not spreading on.

This is true, but actually I still think it will be ok. We do what we can with spacing and handwashing for England, and hug when we have to. The same all through Europe. Denmark and Sweden are doing ok . This is how we will live , gradually moving the posts. It will be ok , steady wins the race. Fear will produce more problems

My understanding is that children can be carriers and spreaders as much as adults. But children don’t usually display symptoms and are not affected in the same and are not at the same risk of becoming seriously ill or dying from this virus.

I think it is a matter of gradually ‘releasing’ individuals back into their roles.
And maybe this one step is perceived as less risky for the vast majority of those involved in the process? Or they just had to pick one to make a start. Or maybe there is hope that as children gradually go back to school then their parents can gradually go back to work.
Nobody really knows the true risk and there has to be a starting point?