Cases rising in secondary school-aged children - more mitigation measures needed?

[noblegiraffe]

The graph that was notable by its absence in this week's briefing has been released and it shows a steep increase in infections in 10-19 year olds. This is backed up by the ONS survey showing an increase in infections in years 7-11.

The Guardian appears to be the only newspaper to have noticed this, with government mouthpiece Prof Viner blathering 'it is likely that much of the transmission among groups of young people may be outside school settings, as we really have limited evidence of transmission within schools', completely ignoring the graph in front of his face that shows the rise looking remarkably coincident with the date schools re-opened.

With people on here insisting that the number of outbreaks in schools ( 13,000 kids in Birmingham currently self-isolating ) is nothing to worry about and that 'educational settings' just means that university data is being misinterpreted as applying to school children, surely this data must give pause for thought?

Maybe cramming kids into small classrooms with poor ventilation and no mitigation measures isn't the brightest idea and a rethink is needed before winter really sets in?

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/02/covid-cases-among-secondary-school-aged-children-rise-in-england

There aren’t massive outbreaks in schools though, so it’s likely the children are catching it outside of school.

What mitigation measures do you suggest?

@Marcellemouse

What mitigation measures do you suggest?

Well compulsory masks everywhere in school would be good, and bring us into line with the rest of the world.

How do you know there aren't massive outbreaks in schools? Local lockdown here and it's spreading through local ones like wildfire. Households aren't mixing so it must be school.

Who on earth believes that this age range are more likely to be catching it out of school, where they are far more likely to be in small groups, than crowded into classrooms with 30 others? School is where children of this age spend most of their time in contact with the highest number of people. Suggesting they are catching it elsewhere is obviously bullshit propaganda and scientists should not be allowed to spout such nonsense without evidence.

Well compulsory masks everywhere in school would be good, and bring us into line with the rest of the world.

Although I hate idea of wearing masks in lessons, one advantage could be that we could then only send the poorly child home if they test positive. This is what they do in France.

@Augustbreeze I agree. Trouble is if a DC of teacher catch CV outside school and test positive it results in loads of DC/teachers being sent home. Would mask wearing mean they could remain in school?

How do you know there aren't massive outbreaks in schools, stairway when kids aren't being tested?

Marcel Gosh, it's like all those other threads never happened.

For a start we could have some sort of announcement that lessons will not take place in classrooms where there are no windows, or the windows don't open. We know ventilation is key (look at the big push in Germany), and yet classrooms are very poorly ventilated. Maybe extra money so that heating can be on in classrooms with open windows so that the kids don't die of cold (combined with a national push to wear a vest).

Cross posted @notevenat20. This would seem a good solution if that were the case.

Who on earth believes that this age range are more likely to be catching it out of school, where they are far more likely to be in small groups, than crowded into classrooms with 30 others?

It seems that large outbreaks in schools are rare. If they were catching it in school you might expect most of the year to get it at the same time.

Our whole school would have to shut if the ventilation rule came in. We have no opening windows.

My sons school are doing a great job of keeping the kids safe. But it means that one positive case and 200 odd kids are at home for 2 weeks.

There was a case in his year and it didn't spread to the other kids. Because of the bubbles and self isolating.

So I'm not entirely sure that they're all catching it at school. But I am sure that if they didn't do self isolation following a positive case that it would spread like wildfire. The result is that kids are spending very little time actually at school.

If the outbreaks were happening in schools then you would see many kids in the the same class school being infected. 1 or 2 kids in a school getting infected is not an outbreak.

It seems that large outbreaks in schools are rare

How do you know?

It seems that large outbreaks in schools are rare How do you know?

Just from the news. Schools are open all over the world you don’t hear many stories of dozens of cases in a school year.

@stairway

There aren’t massive outbreaks in schools though, so it’s likely the children are catching it outside of school.

Do you think they CAN'T catch it in school? If so, why?

If the outbreaks were happening in schools then you would see many kids in the the same class school being infected.

How do you know that they're not, given the lack of proactive testing in these cases, and children largely having mild symptoms that differ from the ones that you can get a test for, or being asymptomatic?

Noblegiraffe can you produce evidence that 100s of children from the same school are testing positive?

So I'm not entirely sure that they're all catching it at school. But I am sure that if they didn't do self isolation following a positive case that it would spread like wildfire. The result is that kids are spending very little time actually at school.

I am not sure about this. You are infectious before you have symptoms so any child who tests positive must have been in the school infectious before that. And yet they appear typically not to cause an outbreak.

I think it's spreading in schools, but most children aren't showing symptoms. Then a member of staff shows symptoms and tests positive and voila they are the "guilty" one who must have caught it when on a pub/restaurant.

Noblegiraffe can you produce evidence that 100s of children from the same school are testing positive?

There's always some way to try to dodge the data isn't there? Cases in secondary school children are rising.

There was that large outbreak at Northumbria University with 770 students testing positive. Only 78 had symptoms. Why do you think that positive cases in schools are not hiding an awful lot of positive untested cases?

@LynetteScavo

I think it's spreading in schools, but most children aren't showing symptoms. Then a member of staff shows symptoms and tests positive and voila they are the "guilty" one who must have caught it when on a pub/restaurant.

Yes, I've certainly seen claims that cases in schools are 'largely among staff' therefore they must have caught it in the staffroom/pub.

Not that there are asymptomatic kids spreading it.

It would be interesting if they did a massive testing exercise at a school like they are at some universities

Do you think they CAN'T catch it in school? If so, why?

Of course not. This is a game of probabilities. It does seem they are less likely to spread to adults at least. Possible reasons are:

Children don’t get as ill as adults. If you aren’t coughing you aren’t spreading the virus as much.

Children may spend less time with their faces close to each other than adults. DS, for example, is constantly in motion.

Young children are just much shorter than adults so won’t be breathing on them as much.

If there are currently thousands of asymptomatic DC at school will CV surely this could lead to CV not being an issue in education in few months, as most DC will have had it.