'Significant numbers of children become seriously ill with Covid-19'

[0v9c99f9g9d939d9f9g9h8h]

childrensnational.org/news-and-events/childrens-newsroom/2020/significant-number-of-children-become-seriously-ill-with-covid-19

Those who like to use the word mongering when posters talk about poor outcomes, look away now.

We don't know enough to send children back to school. About the virus. About the scope of our government's scientific advice. About our competency to meet the tests for leaving lockdown. They seem to have become conditional but they needed to be non-negotiable.

We're not Finland. We're utterly crap compared to Finland. So let's not pretend we'll have Finland's outcomes just because Finland is clever. (And roomy).

For those who think it's vanishingly unlikely to be your child. Fair enough. But it will be someone's child. So let's get our ducks in a row and hold the government accountable to deliver a competent, proven test and trace system with a low enough transmission rate to ensure it will work.

This is not flu. Flu doesn't create this kind of death toll. We don't even know what it is yet but the urban myths about children being invincible and harmless if infected need to stop. If this goes wrong and we have a vaccine in the the time frame put forward by some researchers, we'll point the finger at the government for not making us wait. Let think twice about what we do instead. The government are responding partly to pressure from the electorate. So let's pressurise them to be competent.

This isn't the blitz... It's potentially so much worse. Our current advisors are saying the only good thing about COVID-19 is the way it passed over children. That isn't the case and it isn't something to rely on.

Even a small risk is too big a risk when it comes to my children, feeling lucky to live in scotland, id say september is a safer time

Do you ever put your children in a car? Let them walk near roads? Is that not too big a risk for you?

Over 14, 000 child casualties in 0-15 year olds per year. 50 deaths.

Considering 500 children have been hospitalised due to CV....

I’ll take my chances with CV over road accidents any day.

Could you explain why you think this poses a far bigger risk to children than any other, when statistically other causes have a far higher death rate?

We've lived with, and still do, many viruses throughout history and no one bats an eyelid. As pointed out, in fact, many forgo what are known to be effective vaccines for some of these viruses. Why is this one the reason why people need to imprison themselves for the foreseeable future?

Does anyone have the numbers of children admitted to hospital with CV?

I can't find those and while I accept that current stats show death as being a very low risk, I would like to understand the risk of my child ending up on a ventilator with an extended hospital stay too.

Does anyone have the numbers of children admitted to hospital with CV?

500 last i checked. From gov.uk stats pages.

I work on a children's ward. Since lockdown we have had 2 children test positive for covid. Only 1 required an overnight stay and went home the next day.
In the past 2 weeks we have had 3 with the inflammatory syndrome. 2 went to ICU as a precaution. 1 came back to us yesterday. None of them were ventilated or required respiratory support, it is just guidance to send them because of the potential of being seriously ill. One of the 3 has developed a heart problem due to the syndrome but it is not serious and they remain with us rather than a cardiac ward.
This is from a population of over 10,000 children.

We've had more staff with covid than patients on our ward.

The fact that the numbers have risen from 20 to 100 in just a few weeks is a concern, but hopefully it will peak and fall and track the virus infection rates generally. I am not sure there is much scaremongering going on. Discussing the numbers is not scaremongering and everyone will have their own idea about what risk they are prepared to accept. What's not ok is to be aggressive onwards those who have made a different decision perhaps because their life circumstances are different

I think people deal with threats differently, some will seek to minimise this information as a coping strategy initially because let's face it, it's not good news is it. It underlined the need for caution rather than abandon in all we do

Agreed, the fact that the numbers have risen despite lockdown and schools closed to me is concerning. To others may not be.

No one has said to lock Children in a room.

Every Child and every Parent is different. Different views, different priorities, different circumstances. And that is fine. I'd like to see no fines / L.A involvement for those who choose to home school during this.

Personally I think the government are being absolutely foolish in opening schools so soon and when not enough is known about the new syndrome, and when our new cases etc rates are still high.
I think they've been foolish and have undoubtedly mishandled many aspects of this crisis, and therefore I do not trust them with the Children's safety aspect. I would like to know full details of exactly what the science they are apparently following with regards school opening. The percentage of the workforce who cannot work from home and who also rely on school as Childcare is actually quite low.

I can find deaths by age and positive CV test by age but not hospital admissions by age.

If anyone has a link to that data it would be really helpful. Thank you.

I heard somewhere that Chris Whitty is meeting with the teaching unions today. It was only anecdotal so I don’t know it’s definitely happening but if it is then there may be more clarity on the science soon.

@fairgame84 that's really interesting. Good to hear from someone who knows about these things.

The thread title is taken directly from the article title of the link. Unfortunately some information is just scary. Very inconvenient if you're trying to minimise bad news, I do appreciate.

There is some suggestion children don't manifest an inflammatory response until 6 weeks after infection. As the child may have shown no COVID-19 symptoms, it will be difficult to link the inflammatory response directly with COVID-19. So we need time to look into it as with so many other issues. We can't even get good data on this until that time period had passed following the most recent surge.

100 children in New York apparently have this syndrome. I'm not sure why the odds of it happening to one individual personally are used to close down debate. It may not be your family but it will be someone else's family. And it could be you as easily as someone else. And if you're speaking generally to a huge group of people, you can't tell each one of them that it won't be them, or their family. That's just ridiculous. It is highly likely to be some of them.

The car analogy is utterly manipulative and misleading. It's been picked apart effectively many times recently on here but some posters are still using it. Why don't you stick it on the side of a bus?This isn't a race to the bottom. These are our children.

That aside, why would this article not be of deep interest to parents in the middle of a pandemic, in the context of a discussion about children back to school?! I'm not saying any one opinion should take precedence but I'm appalled at the agenda-laden, dismissive manner in which some posters respond to information that should be sobering to any parent. There are a range of responses between hysteria and callous indifference - one extreme seems as irrational and unhelpful as the other.

I get the impression some posters have taken a position that facilitates what they want to do and will note apply a combination of selective deafness and confirmation bias to everything they don't want to hear thereafter. Fair enough but don't pretend it's a rational approach!

now

Guess everyone has paid for the varicella vaccine for their children then? MenACWY for those children not yet eligible? No?...

I'm not saying any one opinion should take precedence but I'm appalled at the agenda-laden, dismissive manner in which some posters respond to information that should be sobering to any parent.

And I find your manner dramatic and scientifically illiterate.

I get the impression some posters have taken a position that facilitates what they want to do and will note apply a combination of selective deafness and confirmation bias to everything they don't want to hear thereafter. Fair enough but don't pretend it's a rational approach!

I would certainly agree with this judging by your response.

I'm not saying any one opinion should take precedence but I'm appalled at the agenda-laden, dismissive manner in which some posters respond to information that should be sobering to any parent

I follow the science.

My child is no more at risk going back to school than they were previously. The added risk of CV is negligible beside all the previous risks of other diseases or accidents.

I have no agenda. Yes my child may be one of the few with complications. But they may also be one of the few that has complications from flu, mumps, measles, or catches TB or meningitis, or has an accident on the way to school. The risk is negligible compared to all the other risks of leaving the house.

The risk is to other, vulnerable people my child may come into contact with, and spread the virus to.

Terry

Ah but which science are you guided by? Using the word 'the' doesn't achieve what you're hoping it will. It's a perfectly scientific and not groundbreaking idea that we should hold the government accountable to the steps they pledged to take before easing lockdown when they maintained they were being guided by 'the science'. Leaving aside the matter that anyone in the scientific community would know that being guided by the science is frequently a matter of jumping onto a bus heading one direction for five minutes before switching to a different route, finding a new map and going to an entirely different destination. It's not a straight line and it's disingenuous to pretend that being guided by 'the science' in some way precludes having an agenda.

But do explain although I suspect you won't. Why is it scientifically illiterate to point out what a chief scientific advisor got into trouble for mentioning yesterday? Was it the wrong science for you? What is allowed to be literate?

For me the worry is that this is such a new virus and new things are being found out about it all the time.

This Kawasaki like illness in children is only now coming to light. As it can manifest between 6 and 8 weeks after infection we really don't know how prevalent this is going to be yet.

I can't see how government can justify moving so quickly when there doesn't seem to be any cohesive plan between what society is being told to do Vs what schools will be doing and where we, as a country, are doing so much worse than many other countries and yet aren't taking the precautionary measures that other better performing countries are doing.

But do explain although I suspect you won't.

I won't, you're right. Because it's tiresome.

Meningitis is also contagious and can be fatal ...
my daughter contracted this when she was 3 and almost died . We were on holiday and the rest of the family had to take tablets as it was very contagious.

We live with these diseases, we can't hide in our homes forever..
none of us are immortal so we need to get on with it basically and use common sense !

OP - this may help reassure you. This chart compares ONS deaths by age in 2020 compared with the 5 year average.

You can see the effect of the pandemic in that deaths in the over 45s rose sharply in April compared to the historical average.

However, in the middle of the pandemic - deaths of children fell to way way below the historical average. Even if there is some small percentage of children that have a complication this is way less than the risk that children faced every day from being out and about.

This is the ultimate way to test the risk - when it was spreading uncontrolled in March did it lead to excess deaths in children? It can’t be explained by children not being exposed as the excess deaths of elderly people show that there was significant spread.

(Thanks to a mumsnetter on another thread)

HeyBlaby
Actually i have paid for CP vax. Dd2 woukd have scratched and scarred.
Meningitis yes i will be paying unfortunately dd1 is rather difficult (SEN) and we have left it a while.
I will also be paying for a BCG for both of them.
Mine are both very high risk for asthma. And dd1 got very ill with hfm then had a kawasaki type issue where temp was really high for months (ear infection?) but had a new heart murmur too.
I think it is reasonable to be concerned as they know the kids are getting pneumonia too. Adults they know can have long term heart and lung issues. Everyone is focussing on the adults so not sure they are even checking kids for long term issues. Anyone respiratory infections lead to asthma.

Ah but which science are you guided by?

Personally, i’m looking at pubmed publications, peer reviewed literature, government stats from a variety of countries.

Plus years of studying science and current and past knowledge of coronaviruses, Sars like diseases..

Using years of experience assimilating scientific data and drawing my own conclusions.

I don’t know what @MrsTerryPratchett cv looks like but that is what I mean.

Of course my conclusions are only my conclusions and people may think differently. But IMO my kids aren’t at increased risk going to school.

@bluebluezoo could you please link to any data showing number of under 19s hospitalised due to CV?

I've been to the .gov page and the only age separated data I can find is for deaths and positive CV test results.

The positive results for under 19s comes to around 2300 which seems high to me based on the facts that:

A) they haven't in the most part been out in society due to school closures, supermarket rules and social distancing
B) they are not eligible for testing unless hospitalised or under the new rules instated 2 weeks ago, they have a household member who is a keyworker who is showing symptoms of CV.

The number of positive tests for under 20s is just because they don’t exhibit symptoms that merit testing. Schools did not close until 20th March so they were fully out in the community. Allow a 1-2 week lag for symptoms and 1-2 weeks for hospitalisation and they would totally be in the statistics. Plus many adult key workers are likely to have kids.

The fact that death rates have fallen for children compared to normal has to be positive and is simply inconsistent with them being vulnerable etc. Especially as before lockdown, many over 70s were already shielding when kids were still at school but we still see elevated death rates for over 70s.

There seems to be a big focus on death rate. I think we all acknowledge that there have been very few deaths in under 19s due toCV.

What we have no visibility of is serious illness rates.

Death is not my only concern, I also do not want my child in hospital seriously ill, even if the chance of her actually dying is slim.

In the last 2 weeks we have learned of this post infection syndrome which hits 6-8 weeks after infection, we have also learned that there is a chance of ongoing kidney issues for people who recover due to damage cause by the virus.

And actually most children are not eligible for testing so we really don't have visibility of how many have been infected so far.

www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-getting-tested

My daughter would only be eligible for a test if she needed to be hospitalised as neither me or DH are key workers and both are working from home. 80% of the children in her class are in the same position. If I extrapolate that then the 2300 children who have tested positive so far are from the 20% of the population of children who are eligible for testing. Now I have to extrapolate and make assumptions as the data is not available for me to view to give me actual numbers.

If the government are so confident that the science backs up the decision they have made then why have they not published the SAGE report. They have been asked to multiple times, but just say that they will when they feel it's right to do so.