Closing schools actually causes more Covid 19 deaths long term

[Lucyandbet]

www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/new-study-confirms-advice-given-to-the-uk-government-about-school-closures/
This has probably already been discussed to death on here but I found this article surprising.

What about the vulnerable people under 70 who are directly impacted by huge numbers of pupils/staff packed into schools every day with no masks or social distancing? Staff, siblings, family members?

The government decision to allow close contacts and family members of positive cases back into school every day (which being tested with a completely unreliable LF test) will only make things much much worse.

@SylvanianFrenemies

The "protect the vulnerable" approach assumes that vulnerable people can somehow be kept separate. I'm very vulnerable- but my 9yo and 4yo still need me at home, and need hugs! We can't separate the millions of elderly and otherwise more vulnerable people off from society medium or long term.

It also presumes that older people don't live with and/or are not cared for by their younger relations who have school aged children, if the children aren't also carers themselves.

I think there's been some moving on since this was written - the appearance of new strains, largely due to the virus having had opportunities to circulate widely amongst sections of society, has added more weight to the suppress / minimise case rather than the herd immunity case. There's a good reason now to avoid letting it rip through schools, young people, etc.

@Lucyandbet

I didn’t say it would be.
But the more people who have been vaccinated, the less the virus can spread between people, including children.

As I said, I expect to go back to school long before we are at that stage, but it’s not really safe is it.

It's also quite blinkered to assert that "over 70s should isolate" given that in many communities they couldn't do this without finding themselves new houses! Only some over 70s live in neat family units where the younger members of the family just pop over for Sunday lunch now and again. That's the kind of discriminatory-without-realising thinking that leads to poor outcomes for large sections of society.

Apologies for last few words. Dodgy typing.

And the parent age groups are now skyrocketing. :(

@Lucyandbet

It's not saying kids don't catch and spread it, just people under 70 are unlikely to die so emphasis on that age group would be more effective in reducing the number of deaths.

What about school staff, children and parents who ECV?

@Orf1abc

It supports the projection that while general social distancing would reduce the number of covid-19 cases, it would increase the total number of deaths compared with social distancing of over 70s only.

It's an interesting read, confirming that the government were too focused on minimising cases rather than minimising deaths. So a more targeted, individualised approach would have produced better outcomes. Unfortunately that's something this government is very bad at, just look at the way people with disabled people are treated by them.

Doesn't that somewhat assume that the only thing people are worried about is dying from it?

I don't believe that's the case - most people I know of a similar age to me (30's-40's) accept they're unlikely to die but don't want to catch it nonetheless.

Mainly due to long COVID or not wanting to get the more severe end of 'mild' cases which means 2-3 weeks of being too ill to work if you're self employed.

Lucy we understand and disagree.
I already covered your point. You cant effectively shield the over 70s completely. Yes they are already doing that anyway but even with the situation now enough are catching to pressure the hospitals..... So.you dont think there would have been many more if everyone around them had covid at once?

Personally im more concerned about the health of the working age people.and kids. letting it rip through is going to (and certainly would in your scenario) cost a fortune in health care and benefits etc.
The deaths in younger people may have to.be multiplied by 10 (10% immunity now) so.dont seem as low then.

The link the OP put up is from the Great Barrington declaration back in Oct.

Have a look at what's happening in Sweden which has for the most advocated no lockdown and herd immunity spread.

www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2020/12/sweden-s-covid-19-failures-have-exposed-myths-lockdown-sceptics

It's basically who's lives after more, nice, thanks OP.

Matter not after

[quote Lucyandbet]@DBML as the vaccination is not going to be given to DC you'd be teaching from home for a very long time. This would likely be much more detrimental to all DC long term than theories of possible long term health impacts of them catching Covid 19.[/quote]
Have you trawled the internet to look for a glimmer of hope that suits your narrative?

Yes it hard for kids. It's hard for all of us!

Published on 7th October.

A lot has changed since then.

Do you work in a school op?

Have I missed something in that article? Does it explain anywhere why closing schools will result in more covid deaths, because I can't see any explanation and can't think of one.

I agree Staffy1 it's a bit short on facts and reasons.

Also, it was published 10th Oct as others have pointed out and peered reviewed, so using data from well before that.

It's obvious that reducing community transmission is in everyone's interests and that the key driver of community transmission since September have been schools.

@Staffy1

Have I missed something in that article? Does it explain anywhere why closing schools will result in more covid deaths, because I can't see any explanation and can't think of one.

It basically says that suppressing spread just prolongs the epidemic - so therefore more deaths over time. While if you just let it run through it will be over quicker, so fewer deaths. Which ignore some basic facts that there is a vaccination in the pipeline, mutations if you let it spread, and that there is no lobg term immunity

@christinarossetti19, that's what I thought, schools have surely increased the spread.
@GleamingBaubles, thanks for explaining what it was getting at.

There is the point that the mitigations that are prolonging the spread are allowing the virus to mutate. I'm not saying I agree with any of this, I was also surprised when I read the article.

@SusannahSophia

Interesting, but see how schools closing for the Christmas holidays have made a bit dent in the 10-19 age group infection rate. The bright green line.

Like every other colour too 🙄

What about all the over 70s who (happily) do childcare or school pick ups?

@Timeturnerplease that is their prerogative but completely reckless in my opinion.

Don't forget that the most vulnerable are in care homes - staffed mostly by women, who often have children at school.... It is completely impossible to isolate the vulnerable from the rest of society.