Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

What’s the consensus on how contagious infected children are?

22 replies

miimblemomble · 22/09/2020 06:36

Here in France, the scientific advisors and the government have taken a very strong line that children aged 10 and under are basically non- contagious (child to child, child to adult) even if they test positive for Covid. Children in primary do not wear masks. If a child tests positive, then none of the other children in the class nor the teacher (who does wear a mask) are considered to be at risk of infection, and continue to attend school as normal.

Is this the general consensus in scientific circles?

OP posts:
Popcornriver · 22/09/2020 06:53

I've read everything from children don't get the virus Hmm to they don't spread it to they spread it just as much as any other age group. More than half of the schools in my area are now affected by covid. Our school has been amazing but it's not covid secure. That's a joke. There's no such thing as covid secure in schools. The government needs to consider schools in their restrictions.

Keepdistance · 22/09/2020 09:36

I dont know really there are a lot of outbreaks here in primary. Hard to know here if thats mainly teacher/ta passing it on. Or kids getting outside school.
At least in france you are saying the teacher can wear a mask they cant here and they know that teachers are giving it to each other as a minimum.
Also with no mask wearing at all my kids and us are off. Dc1 had to have a covid test after 8d at school. And now the rest of us have a dry cough.

I think it is in france as here the gov are happy to allow young kids to be infected as they are 'low risk'

Kaiserin · 22/09/2020 09:59

Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

I know there's something about ACE-2 receptors not being quite so numerous in prepubescent kids. So it is plausible they would shed smaller amounts of virus.
But kids do get ill, so the virus does grow within their body, and there's no reason to think it won't leak out through various orifices (not just the mouth and nose... The virus can be found in sewage water)

And kids are terrible at following basic hygiene rules (not just about sneezing and coughing, also washing their hands after going to the loo). That's why they're do good at spreading other illnesses (bless them! Can't blame them, they're kids!)

It's hard to tell which effect is stronger (small viral load VS poor hygiene), but a blanket "nah, they're not contagious" sounds more political (schools need to stay open for the economy) than medical/scientific.

Note: It may or may not be the right approach. Wait and see... It does sound risky. Only time can tell if that's a risk worth taking.

Cornettoninja · 22/09/2020 10:04

Early on I read the theory that the virus attacks ACE receptors and children biologically don’t have as many therefore they have less capability of the virus replicating.

Haven’t looked for anything since but scientists were definitely researching the possibility. I don’t think there’s anything definitive though,

Cornettoninja · 22/09/2020 10:05

Cross posted with you there @Kaiserin - one of the distracting dc about ! Grin

MagpieSong · 22/09/2020 10:33

Many sound studies show children are infectious and I’d tend towards believing those. Children were not having issues when schools opened with small bubbles of 5 or so children and the overall infection rates had been brought under control through restrictions, which doesn’t mean to say they aren’t infectious when infected. It has always seemed unusual to suggest infected children would not spread the virus at all, they have no true understanding of hygiene until they’re older and spread other viruses. I just had a child drink from my sons water bottle (5-6yo) at school - just shows how much they are in contact. 30 children is a huge bubble and no evidence I could find proved any safety with bubbles that size. Children will touch faces, cough and forget to wash hands etc. They don’t have good judgement for what a metre is and are not encouraged to be wearing masks, which could be tricky if evidence finds they are spreading even for shorter time frames. I don’t think any other viral illness is not passed on by children (could be wrong so do correct this if I am), so this points to me that the sensible conclusion is they do spread when infected.

The main point at the beginning was lack of solid evidence and a large amount of variables, which is not really the same as ‘they don’t spread it’, despite the message given. There are differing opinions on this, but recent studies have demonstrated high viral loads in children (in Chicago they were under 5yo) with the virus, that and that asymptomatic spreaders can spread for weeks without being noticed. The possibility that more children are asymptomatic may be why they were seen as not spreading the virus, as they were less likely to have gone to hospital and tested positive originally. Another study, in Northern Italy during March and April, based around contact tracing of more than 1,000 cases of Covid-19 found that children from birth to age 14 had a higher risk of passing the virus onto others than any other age group. Their risk of transmitting the virus was 22.4% – over twice that of adults aged 30-49. Studies like this make more sense, based on what we know of other viruses, but to be definite we have to wait for lots of strong evidence and extra studies that explore the whys. (Eg. Are children infectious for less time, but with higher viral loads so have a short highly infectious period but less time to spread it around etc.) The Italian findings were also the younger the child, the higher the viral load in their nose.

Recent outbreaks in a number of schools support they do spread the virus. The NIHR are currently doing a study on transmission in children with schools now reopen. One issue in the UK is the lack of good tracing information. In other countries, tracing data does support transmission where children are meeting without restrictions (eg. No masks, large bubbles that are class size or other big groups, general restrictions eased) and particularly where overall case numbers are higher (making it more likely children have come into contact with an infected person).

Healthy children are less at risk of death, but we don’t know whether long term effects will occur, it’s possible. Those who catch it and do get seriously ill are at risk of multi system inflammatory Syndrome. A number of studies strongly suggested maximum caution reopening education centres, but this was ignored by the government who’s policy for younger children (seen as not able to social distance, not asked to wear masks) is simply to remove communal school areas and provide hand washing materials, not to follow the smaller bubbles proved useful and safer in studies. This approach is literally a ‘if they get it, they get it’ scenario and tells parents and schools to rely on Test and Trace heavily in every document. It’s based on recording those who get it, not attempting to prevent children picking it up. Unfortunately, we are yet to have a properly performing test and trace, and so can only rely on a wink and a wish to get through with some biting sarcasm in letters to MPs. Oh, and a nice fine if we feel our families are not safe with our children at school and want to keep them off without losing our school place.

Porcupineinwaiting · 22/09/2020 10:46

No one ever believes me but our neighbours 4 year old passed cv to his parents and little sister. He wasnt tested (this was back end of April) but he was sick a good week before they came down with it and had an awful cough, temp and diarrhoea. His parents are key workers and tested positive.

MarshaBradyo · 22/09/2020 10:49

That is a strong line to take

I don’t think it’s definitive but younger children seem to not spread it as much

Jrobhatch29 · 22/09/2020 10:50

That's interesting about France. I didn't know they had taken that approach. I think there is no general consensus which is frustrating. I've only known 2 sisters test positive and this was very recently (age 7 and 11). Mild, cold symptoms and tested positive but parents negative. Obviously this is just one example and means nothing.

MarshaBradyo · 22/09/2020 10:50

Anecdotally having visited a nursery with pretty much zero mitigation but running at full capacity for a few months it’s worth assessing the possibility

Ecosse · 22/09/2020 10:52

The disruption in schools has not been due to millions of DC catching Coronavirus- very few actually have.

The issue is that DC are sent home whenever they get the sniffles and then cannot access tests, so are off for weeks.

Some schools are also going against the guidelines and sending home whole bubbles whenever a DC has symptoms.

Marcellemouse · 22/09/2020 10:54

The 12 year old dc who had it at my dcs’ school didn’t pass it onto anyone else in his year ( who all were sent home for 2 weeks) or bizarrely anyone else in his family. It’s still a mystery where he caught it.

Tfoot75 · 22/09/2020 10:56

Still waiting for any evidence or data on transmission in primary schools - have heard nothing but isolated individual cases or transmission between staff, so in theory it's supported. Worldwide there has been no serious outbreak in primary aged children (or link if anyone has ever seen one). Outbreak is 2 or more cases, these seem to be extremely infrequent in primary schools (except among staff).

Jrobhatch29 · 22/09/2020 11:03

@Marcellemouse

The 12 year old dc who had it at my dcs’ school didn’t pass it onto anyone else in his year ( who all were sent home for 2 weeks) or bizarrely anyone else in his family. It’s still a mystery where he caught it.
Yes, the two girls in my example above haven't passed it to any family or either of their school bubbles
Witchend · 22/09/2020 11:15

@Marcellemouse

The 12 year old dc who had it at my dcs’ school didn’t pass it onto anyone else in his year ( who all were sent home for 2 weeks) or bizarrely anyone else in his family. It’s still a mystery where he caught it.
Did they not pass it or not pass it to anyone symptomatically?

Because if none of their contacts showed symptoms then they shouldn't have tested.

I think more common to be asymptomatic in children, which may be why people thought they don't pass it between them.
If 80% are asymptomatic then if a child passes it to 5 other children on average only 1 will show symptoms.

Itsabeautifuldayheyhey · 22/09/2020 11:21

The scientific data presented by Chris Witty yesterday showed that the rate of Covid-19 infections had gone up in all age groups but only very slightly in the 0-10 age group. He mentioned it as an exception in rates going up.

Foobydoo · 22/09/2020 11:28

Wishful thinking.

The fact that hospital admissions because of covid are now rising in females in the 20 to 40 bracket is very worrying.

There is also evidence of spread in schools
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/family-kids-news/every-year-group-hit-covid-18972301
Then add in the testing issues, schools are a disaster waiting to happen.

I understand that life has to go on but, if governments are going to go down that path they need to resume sheilding and protect the vulnerable. Give parents the option of temporary homeschool if they or family members are vulnerable. And a proper efficient test, track and trace is needed as a matter of urgency.

At the moment ecv parents are being threatened with fines or being pushed into deregistration by many schools which is completely unacceptable. And so many people are unable to get tested than soon we will not know where the virus is.

What’s the consensus on how contagious infected children are?
Ecosse · 22/09/2020 11:35

I absolutely agree that shielding should be resumed- I’d go further and offer the opportunity for household members of those shielding to stay at home with wages fully funded.

This would be far safer and actually more cost-effective than shutting down everything but forcing the vulnerable into work.

BogRollBOGOF · 22/09/2020 11:42

I'm hearing about local schools having a member of staff or a child off with a positive test result, but there doesn't seem to be evidence that they are spreading it widely amongst their peers, especially amongst the youngest groups that had access to school/ nursery in June/ July and the children of key workers who were highest risk through their parents. I know social distancing was different prior to September and it basically can't happen in schools, but statistically superspreader events through aerosol could still have been viable and hasn't occured.

MarshaBradyo · 22/09/2020 12:10

Op do you mean the positive child stays in class?

Di they stay home with symptoms? I assume so?

MarshaBradyo · 22/09/2020 12:11

And do asymptomatic children get tested often?

miimblemomble · 22/09/2020 13:55

@MarshaBradyo

A child with a positive test is told to stay off school for at least 7 days after either a positive test or the symptoms appearing - whichever is soonest. But other children and mask-wearing adults in school are not considered to be at risk - so not told to test or isolate. We don't have bubbles here and all adults in schools wear masks.

Similarly a child with symptoms. Told to stay home and get a test, back in school in 7 days unless still ill. But no one they've been in contact with at school is told to isolate.

The government is really clamping down on class / school closures - that's the main aim. Over-zealous school heads have had their knuckles rapped and told that the minimum threshold to close a class is more than three positive cases in a class.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page