I really try to come up with solutions. I start thinking about practical solutions, like having three classes on one floor, one maths, one science, one English, and the teachers rotating, and then I think... how did the kids get there? How did we keep them distanced on the way up? Where did we line up the different classes outside?
And it is just completely impossible to get them to maintain 2m or even 1m whilst they are doing this. At least, not with anywhere near the volume of students people want us to do it with. It takes us about 20 minutes to get students from a single year group to line up and come into an exam, and they crowd up. It's really hard to make them stand in a straight line and keep the classes apart. Same goes when we have fire drills. They're just not going to do it, not at all. And I keep coming back to this:
If students can pass on the virus at anywhere near the rate adults do, and if the infection mortality rate of this virus is anywhere near 1%, schools cannot open. They really can't. We need to sort out those ifs. Or we need to get cases right, right down and be ready to close entire schools down if they get a positive case, tracking and tracing like there's no tomorrow.
Not because the children are at risk, not because the teachers are at risk, but because the whole shebang will go tits up, economy, country, death rate, the lot, if those ifs aren't sorted. It would suck to have kids at home until we controlled transmission within schools, but it would suck a lot more to have exponential growth, overloaded hospitals, and an inability to keep the death rate even to 1% due to lack of available treatment.
I think it's quite possible that children do pass the virus on less then adults. I think it's quite possible that the IFR is more in the 0.4% range than the 1% range. The thing is, I am willing to spend another month or two making sure that is actually the case, rather than just ploughing ahead and finding out I am wrong because everything gets completed fucked up.
Cases in this country are declining. When cases get low enough, we get a whole new set of options open to us, New Zealand style. If we bottle it before we get low enough, and the cases skyrocket again, it will be much, much more costly to the economy to have to do it all again than it would be to continue lockdown a little longer the first time around. Cases rise exponentially, but the fall is far slower. You don't want to have to do it twice.
There was a poster a while back who kept saying "More haste, less speed" until people got really sick of it. I think it's absolutely the right saying for the moment, though.