100 UK children hospitalised with rare Covid

[Baileysforchristmas]

75% are BAME

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/05/up-to-100-uk-children-a-week-hospitalised-with-rare-post-covid-disease

Obviosuly very worrying for those involved, but also click bait headline grabbing from the Guardian.

The important bit is at the very end of the piece.

"Whittaker said parents should not be alarmed by the surge in hospitalisations because the recent incidence of PIMS is proportionate to the pandemic’s greater impact on adults over recent weeks. “PIMS can be very serious. But we have seen fewer seriously unwell children [in the second wave] because there is earlier recognition and earlier treatment,” she said.

“It remains rare, and we don’t think parents should worry, as it is far more likely not to affect their child than to affect them. The numbers are low and [PIMS] would not be a reason to keep schools from opening. The median age [of onset] is nine years. We would not close playgrounds.”

Up to 100 children?

It would be nice if they could give actual numbers for a bit of context instead of all this up to may could stuff.

I think it might be to encourage/frighten the BAME community into getting the jab

I think this is important to consider, 100 per week is a concerning number.

Naturally people will want to minimise and other, but hopefully we can try to look at this scientifically.

Info of note in the article includes the link to the new variant, which may be a factor in why Scotland is willing to open schools sooner - there rate is half that of England's, and they have more of the original covid.

Also the fact it happens to children who had asymptomatic covid.

I hope the government will be honest and take this seriously.

It isn't ok to just have high rates of covid circulating round schools for a number of reasons - mutation, vaccine escape and this.

@Baileysforchristmas

I think it might be to encourage/frighten the BAME community into getting the jab

No, I think it is because 100 children per week in intensive care is a serious issue.

Yes and 75% are BAME even though they are15% of the population, that’s a very high percentage

i think this is important to consider, 100 per week is a concerning number.

Absolutely it is.

Naturally people will want to minimise and other

Its not minimising to question the use of up to 100 per week and want to know what actual numbers are.

No, I think it is because 100 children per week in intensive care is a serious issue.

The article doesn't say that

And just to reiterate, wanting to discuss the actual FACTS and not the 'maybes, could and up to' given in the story is not minimising.

FFS, the original headline was UP TO 100, not 100 every week. That means that at the peak there were 100 admissions in a week. The data (what they actually give of it) is presented in a very ambigious way. It sounds like this is a follow up to a study that was published by the Lancet last July - so they are monitoring the situation closely.

Yes, it is a huge concern that these children are ill. (That is why they are reviewing and studying the data.)

Yes, they really need to investigate further why there is a bigger impact for BAME children. (Again, this is why they collect and study the data.)

But there is a very minimal risk (almost 0 in fact) to most children in the general population.

There is a fine line between presenting information to the public under journalistic right to know, and frankly scaremongering doomsday like headlines designed to drive clicks through their website - have enough of this from The Mail, but seems The Guardian has been going further and further down that rabbit hole recently. The reporting of most science and health reporters over this pandemic has been frankly awful.

Even up to 100, not per week, but just nearly 100, is a bit of a concern. I wonder what is going on here?

@Oblomov21

Even up to 100, not per week, but just nearly 100, is a bit of a concern. I wonder what is going on here?

Up to could mean absolutely anything. It doesn't mean nearly 100 per week. It could mean that there was 1 week a few months ago that had 100 and since then hardly any. Without any actual figures or time frame "up to 100 a week" is meaningless.

Completely different slant here. No mention of 100s of children in hospital, just that they are preparing for an increase in admissions in line with rising cases.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-children-hospitals-intensive-care-pims-b1796419.html

🤷‍♀️ I can’t get worked up about it, or worry. Kids have a higher chance of dying in a car accident.

It isn't ok to just have high rates of covid circulating round schools for a number of reasons - mutation, vaccine escape and this

Yes, especially when there are really easy simple measures to mitigate against airborne spread that currently aren't being used.

Masks from age 6 like in France, Italy, Spain, Korea and the long long long long list of others. Maybe also rotas and social distancing.

If they open without better risk reduction more kids will end up in hospital, and we might get a vaccine resistant strain.

I don't understand the argument that kids are so fragile that it's detrimental to their mental health to wear a mask in school - surely it's MORE detrimental to mental health being a child in a country with 100,000 deaths and lockdown than being one in countries with lower rates, lower deaths, no lockdown and masks in school?

If they open as in December, then the same thing is going to happen as happened in December. Maybe worse if we get an even worse variant exploiting the lovely crowded classrooms.

No, I think it is because 100 children per week in intensive care is a serious issue.

Not minimising but that Independent article says most of the children are treat on wards, a small minority in ICU.

@ThePenIsBlue

🤷‍♀️ I can’t get worked up about it, or worry. Kids have a higher chance of dying in a car accident.

Hear hear

Very important difference there @OliveTree75

Do people realise that children under 5 are more likely to be hospitalised (for anything) than any other age of people?

I don’t think there’s been a time where we have had issues with lack of children’s hospital beds, therefore this whole issue, while not nice for those affected, is really not of concern to me. Which is exactly what the article concludes as well.

The reporting of most science and health reporters over this pandemic has been frankly awful.

Very true, although that was the case before the pandemic too - the sheer volume of news has meant there is much more of it though.

There are some exceptions though, eg data journalists and science reporters at the Times, Sky news and FT have done a decent job, the New York Times also has a good science / health reporter and some of the journalists at more specialised publications have been good.

It's a drop in the ocean compared to
Most winters in paediatrics. Bronchiolitis is a much bigger problem every winter. Last year was the worst for several years, we had to cancel elective surgery because we were bursting at the seams.

I am also not worried at all, it seems to be sensationalist and scaremongering to me, and I don't believe it myself.

Many of those children sadly no doubt would be in hospital anyway given their health conditions, so although I hope they are all okay and recover soon and sent home, I am not worried at all for my dc or family. Most children are completely fine with covid, and the stats indicate that is the most accurate outcome for kids to date. Almost all will recover or not even have symptoms even if they catch it!

So pleased to see people with sense about the poor reporting in this article. There’s a poster on another thread trying to say that this matter will delay schools going back

It won't delay schools, there is no reason for it to - children are in hospital all of the time for all sorts of reasons, and we don't close schools. My dd used to be hospitalised with a flu virus or similar, due to asthma. It happens.

@MNnicknameforCVthreads

So pleased to see people with sense about the poor reporting in this article. There’s a poster on another thread trying to say that this matter will delay schools going back

These kind of articles always bring out people saying "and they are going to open schools?" without any context or comparison to other viruses in children.

Oh I totally agree with you both, it won’t delay schools opening. I meant to put the raised eyebrow emoji at the end of my post!

I agree the article is sloopy. If it reminds even one parent to give their child vitamin D drops then it will have served some purpose.