Will those blaming schools for the rise in cases admit they were wrong?

[notevenat20]

R is now around 0.71 and the case numbers are dropping rapidly (hooray!). It seems obvious this huge improvement has been caused by the lockdown. But schools were open the whole time. It's also therefore clear that schools cannot have been the main cause of the second wave.

We’re in Monmouthshire so a ‘low risk’ area 🙄

What a doom and gloom thread @notevenat20

The whole of dd's sixth form had to shut for 2 weeks due to an outbreak. (Advice from local health team. Until then they'd only sent home direct contacts of positive cases. Other dd's year was sent home due to short staffing due to staff either sick/isolating or looking after sick or isolating dependents. Another local secondary school was told to shut completely. So i wouldn't say schools have been open under lockdown and all kids at school!

What a doom and gloom thread notevenat20

But the topic is about really good news!

Of course schools are a major factor in spread. You just have to look at the infection rates in particular in secondary schools to see this. Rates in children are continuing to rise

Theres literally no logical reason why covid would spread in supermarkets but mysteriously not spread amongst teenagers. Every other virus spreads beautifully in schools

Just because covid spreads in schools does not mean they need to close, however it would be foolish to pretend there isnt an increased risk there. Lockdown also prevents the spread of covid from asymptomatic children to relatives which could also explain a fall in rates during lockdown whole still acknowledging the risk of schools

I think its clear that we cannot have schools open and hospitality. One of thems got to go.

@PrivateD00r - i was just pointing out the illogic of it all. You may not take your children out to dinner but many people will. (I dont have a great nan and my child is autistic and hates crowds as it happens) but i know plenty of people booking dinner and meet ups.

@MrsSlocombesPussy I share your frustration re Ipswich. Suffolk is next to Isle of Wight on line graph of infections and a long way from Sussex the next lowest county in tier 2. If it was not for the infection increase in Ipswich I am sure Suffolk would be in tier 1. Ipswich had really low infection rates only a few weeks ago! I have heard of a lot of people who are mixing in households - very frustrating.

@TheEmojiFormerlyKnownAsPrince

But of course there is 'one case' in the majority of schools.

No there really isn’t! Classes and bubbles popping all the time. It’s rife in my Tier 3 city.

That was in response to a poster saying over 60% of schools have had 'a case'. Of course they will have! What we need is data on how many schools have had it spread within classes.

My school is shut, one third out prior to closure. I don't think there's that many pupils in schools, they're certainly not full.

The reason cases have come down - and case numbers are still way higher than they were in September anyway - is because of the strict lockdown. Of course schools are a driver in transmission but if you take everything else away, that's the ony driver you have left.

Your anecdata is no more valid than mine. You can say my kids' school feels safe, we've had no cases. The same way I can say, my kids' school doesn't feel safe, some weeks there have been multiple cases every day. That's just one school, I make no claims to represent the picture across the country and nor can you. Regardless if it eventually turns out that the role of schools in transmission was less than some believed, there is no doubt that some schools have been hit very hard which has led to children, teachers and families not being safe. In general schools have been woefully supported and data has been misrepresented.

That was in response to a poster saying over 60% of schools have had 'a case'. Of course they will have! What we need is data on how many schools have had it spread within classes.

Yes this would be very valuable data but one I think the government is reluctant to undertake.

I don't really understand why people want to deny that covid-19 spreads in schools.

Surely it is obvious that a virus will spread in a place where lots of households get together 5 days out of 7 a week. If everything else shuts and people are prohibited from meeting elsewhere then this will obviously be where most of the spread happens as other places where it would have happened are shut down.

However, closing schools has negative consequences for children's mental health and for working parents which need to be taken into account when deciding whether or not they should be kept open.

I don't really understand why this has become such an emotive issue for some people.

My year 11 ds has been in school for 12 days since September due to his bubble bursting/half term and firebreak. He’s on his 3rd 14 day isolation period starting today, missing 2 mock exams and his English oral gcse

Yes same here except today marks the fourth isolation my y11 dd has done. Also missing half of her mocks. It’s awful for the kids it really is.

@alreadytaken

If schools had closed the drop in r would have been much greater.

A friend is CEV - had a worrying time recently because their partner got covid. Partner works in a school and has not been going anywhere else - shopping gets delivered. No way can you tell me schools dont contribute to spread.

You can't know this though. ALL the experts are saying otherwise, what do you know that they don't know?

I find it hard to believe that a Tory government would destroy the economy if there was another way round it (such as closing schools).

Can you provide a source for your statement please?

We have not had a single case in my kids school since before October half term and I am sure the school would tell us ( too many parent WhatsApp groups to hide anything for long!).
Some schools closing or some bubbles popping in some areas if England is not an argument to close schools or classes in other areas of England.

For those saying that R would be much lower if schools were shut too, what was R in the first lockdown when schools were shut? I don't think it it was much less than 0.71 but I could be wrong.

What "experts" are saying schools dont contribute to spread? They cannot be as "expert" as you think. ONS data shows outbreaks in schools, Dept Education figures (when they let them out) show very low attendance. Data shows cases declined at half term.

The government wont do rapid testing in schools because they now that would show up just what hotbots of infection they are.

Not sure "R" was published int he first lockdown and the 2 are not comparable.

Given that the rationale for closing non-essential shops, pubs and restaurants was so that schools could remain open, the news today showing a drop in cases can still be achieved is welcome. It was a tough call and I doubt anyone underestimates the extent of the sacrifices we're all having to make but I think the government got the balance right here - educating the future generation is and always should be a priority. You either agree or disagree with that premise.

Outer London secondary school I work in currently has 3 bubbles partially closed across KS4 and KS5. We also have 9 staff currently off ill with covid/isolating with symptoms or a close contacts of positive students. It's great fun. NOT.

@alreadytaken

What "experts" are saying schools dont contribute to spread? They cannot be as "expert" as you think. ONS data shows outbreaks in schools, Dept Education figures (when they let them out) show very low attendance. Data shows cases declined at half term.

The government wont do rapid testing in schools because they now that would show up just what hotbots of infection they are.

Not sure "R" was published int he first lockdown and the 2 are not comparable.

It seems you didn't read my post, try again. Where did I say schools don't contribute? I clearly said closing schools was predicted to reduce R by 0.2

The lockdown has been successful. The only things closed down were hospitality and non essential retail. There lies the answer to reducing the R rate, but it has been known since March. Special pleading from Buisness interests ensures the pandemic continues, as it will again.

alreadytaken, sorry I got mixed up as to which of my posts you were responding to. It isn't hard to read the thread though and I had previously explained my post in full.

I think it’s a positive thread. I agree with the poster who says we really don’t know enough about how this spreads amongst children.

Right now we are blocking household transmission with the lockdown .

We had a few cases in our kids schools before half term but none since. The cases before half term were parents passing it on to the kid. Kid was positive in school but did not pass it on to any other child in their bubble (no they didn’t have tests and could have been asymptomatic). But we have had no major outbreaks in schools round here. Just the odd case.

Rather than kids being the superspreaders some claim I think it’s the opposite. They may be taking some cases in to schools from the community but that’s not causing huge outbreaks.

I think most people claimed this lockdown wouldn’t work if schools stayed open. I think the latest news shows this is not the case. No you can’t have everything open. Happy to prioritise education over pubs and socialising right now though.

Yes that's right. Turns out that if you close pubs and restaurants and stop people from mixing indoors but keep schools open, the infection rate plummets.

And I’m sure if you open pubs and restaurants and let people mix indoors but close schools you’ll end up with very similar results!

And I’m sure if you open pubs and restaurants and let people mix indoors but close schools you’ll end up with very similar results!

I suspect you are wrong. And I wouldn't support it even if you were right.