Long Covid Symptoms rare in children (BBC News)

[KisstheTeapot14]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58071898

Interesting, considering ONS was citing 7 to 12% of children as having Long Covid (2 symptoms or more at 3 months or longer).

I mean if it's accurate, that's great. I am surprised it has contradicted previous data. That's quite a disparity. Is the number of children in study a smallish one, and what are we thinking about the Zoe app?

All opinions welcome.

Have to admit I am a little sceptical. Hoping there are some good scientific minds out there who have been following the data on this one and can enlighten me as to how significant this study is (and does it mirror others from around the world?)

This peer-reviewed study, published in the Lancet Child and Adolescent Health journal, wanted to understand how Covid affected children and how it compared to other respiratory diseases.

It used data provided by parents or carers to the UK Zoe Covid Study app.

The study looked at 1,734 children, aged between five and 17, who were reported to have developed symptoms and tested positive for Covid between September 2020 and February 2021.

Fewer than one in 20 (4%) of those with Covid experienced symptoms for four weeks or more, with one in 50 (2%) having symptoms for more than eight weeks.

You might want to check out this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4314065-Long-covid-rare-in-children

There's a thread about this already.

People were reassured or said 'Hang on, that's a heck of a lot of children' depending on their view.

Already done a tread OP. People basically told me I was ‘clutching at straws’ for thinking 2% is rare & for believing the ‘propaganda’ 🙄

Sorry all - didn't see the previous thread! Just finished reading it.

''BBC getting going early on its propaganda, ready for the new term.''

Yes, I am getting weary of the mantra 'schools are safe'.

I want DS to go in Sept but I feel there are unanswered questions about long term implications of Covid for children.

in medical terms 2% isn't rare. 1 in 1000 or rarer is rare. There you are.

However, the BBC did use "rare" in their headline. I think it is a journalist thing, use a short word where you can, even if it's inaccurate.