Media blackout on school cases this term

[3asAbird]

I find it really odd all English secondary schools are back including my own children's school.
They all did testing well over a week ago.
Neither the news letter or local rag that normally lives for this kind of news has reported any postive cases which find hard to believe.

I asked primary head and she said only if 5or more cases would they inform parents and I argued how do vunerable parents or parents of vunerable kids assess risk to them if they unaware.
I would love to see more transparency on how many postives each week and % of kids who have tested.
Also phe clear published figures how much infections within educational settings each week.

The current newsletters are like alternate universe where covid doesn't exist.
None of my kids are vaccinated and 1 has ashma.

Think people summoning any absence i school or staff possibly maybe covid but I dislike all the secrecy.

I work in a school in an extremely hard hit area. So far this term we've had 0 cases caught at school, and 2 off that caught it over summer, whereas when we closed at the end of summer term we had around 15 cases with several classes closed.

@cantkeepawayforever

75 cases and every one of them well enough to get up and go to college, and now isolating.. I'm not seeing a problem here? Genuinely which part of that is scary or bad?

No - as it draws from far and wide, every student was given a test pack on enrolment and required to do the tests at home - facilities were available within the college for anyone who wanted it, but the advice was to test at home as a very large majority of the students arrive by public transport and the public health risk of coming in to test was obvious.

As a result, how ill they are is unknown - and tbh that isn't information I should have. One member of staff died yesterday after being very ill for longer than 28 days, so not counted in the statistics.

That's very different to your other post, but even better, the LFT's are working, the students didn't even get on site to mingle.

I am sorry about your colleague

It's not ideal, as LFTs pick up 50% of the cases in the best possible case scenario. So in all probability there were at least 150 cases at the start of term, 75 of which were detected, 75 not.

Luckily, that setting has chosen to keep a significant number of mitigations fully in place - class layouts that allow staff distancing, masks in communal areas inside, compulsory window opening, an internal reporting system for lfts, no assemblies or similar and systems that allow social distancing.

It's interesting that i am told in my own setting that none of this is possible, because 'it's not in the guidance', whereas another setting does it routinely and with the full blessing - and approval - of public health....

(AndI happen to think that at least 75, more likely 150, cases in a single setting in a 'low' cases areas was...not great. Maybe it's just me, and I've missed the 'boiling frog in a pan' scenario where we all get inured to huge numbers of cases and where 150 - 200 deaths a day are seen as 'not a problem')

There’s absolutely no reason why parents need to or should be informed of positive covid tests.

It would be plainly ludicrous to report that Deborah in 6F was off with flu or Mrs Smith has a broken leg.

Personally I would ban schools from disseminating this information- the head is the only person who needs to know. That would put a stop to some of the hysterics.

There’s absolutely no reason why parents need to or should be informed of positive covid tests.

If you were the parent of a CEV child - under 12, so not eligible for vaccination - would you perhaps need to know if the child they sat next to in class for 6 hours a day had a positive test?

Or that there had been 8 confirmed cases in the class within 10 days?

Or that the TA who worked with them 1:1 in every lesson at close quarters has tested positive?

Or even that there are 8 families within the class where at least one, and often several, of the family have Covid but under new regulations the child themselves is still in school - in fact, they went for a PCR test last night, but because they are asymptomatic at present, they are in class until the test results come back?

I think there are SOME families where there is a genuine need to know about positive Covid tests.

There is also the point that, without information, one has to assume the worst. I have to assume, in term time, because I come into contact with so many people at close quarters every day for very extended periods, I am always in danger of being infected but not yet symptomatic. So as a result, I don't visit my very elderly parents - at high risk even though vaccinated - in term time.

If we had better information - if children were required to test and we were aware of positive cases - and were allowed some mitigations that were scaled with the number of cases, then I would not have to consistently act as if the worst case scenario was true.

But there is no danger of Mrs Smith's broken leg meaning that I could also break mine, is there?

If you were the parent of a CEV child - under 12, so not eligible for vaccination - would you perhaps need to know if the child they sat next to in class for 6 hours a day had a positive test?

And what could you do at that point? Absolutely nothing! They would have already been exposed to the virus by that point, you can't go back in time and keep them off school to avoid close contact with whoever did end up testing positive

@CallmeHendricks

But there is no danger of Mrs Smith's broken leg meaning that I could also break mine, is there?

But if you’re immune suppressed, chicken pox and other similar viruses are a serious concern and we never gave detailed info on them before.

@cantkeepawayforever

There’s absolutely no reason why parents need to or should be informed of positive covid tests.

If you were the parent of a CEV child - under 12, so not eligible for vaccination - would you perhaps need to know if the child they sat next to in class for 6 hours a day had a positive test?

Or that there had been 8 confirmed cases in the class within 10 days?

Or that the TA who worked with them 1:1 in every lesson at close quarters has tested positive?

Or even that there are 8 families within the class where at least one, and often several, of the family have Covid but under new regulations the child themselves is still in school - in fact, they went for a PCR test last night, but because they are asymptomatic at present, they are in class until the test results come back?

I think there are SOME families where there is a genuine need to know about positive Covid tests.

There is also the point that, without information, one has to assume the worst. I have to assume, in term time, because I come into contact with so many people at close quarters every day for very extended periods, I am always in danger of being infected but not yet symptomatic. So as a result, I don't visit my very elderly parents - at high risk even though vaccinated - in term time.

If we had better information - if children were required to test and we were aware of positive cases - and were allowed some mitigations that were scaled with the number of cases, then I would not have to consistently act as if the worst case scenario was true.

As the parent of a child who is extremely vulnerable to respiratory viruses, I cant help but wonder where the concern was pre-covid. As with the vast majority of vulnerable children he has always been vulnerable to illnesses that other children shrug off. He came within a hairs bredth of PICU as the result of a common cold (and only stayed out because there was a child who needed the bed more, so the rationing of care/overwhelming of NHS was definitely there pre-covid). As it was he ended up in an HDU bed, being constantly monitored, on oxygen and at for a few hours constant nebuliser. Again this was from a common cold. Funnily enough though I've never expected to be informed of how many children in his class have a cough or cold or how many of their parents have a cough or cold that they could be carrying assymptomacally. I would be living in a constant state of panic if that happened. Instead I've dealt with illness when he does get ill, I've had to learn over the years when he is and when he isn't coping and when he needs extra help. And I expect to continue in that way even with covid in the mix.

@cantkeepawayforever

There’s absolutely no reason why parents need to or should be informed of positive covid tests.

If you were the parent of a CEV child - under 12, so not eligible for vaccination - would you perhaps need to know if the child they sat next to in class for 6 hours a day had a positive test?

Or that there had been 8 confirmed cases in the class within 10 days?

Or that the TA who worked with them 1:1 in every lesson at close quarters has tested positive?

Or even that there are 8 families within the class where at least one, and often several, of the family have Covid but under new regulations the child themselves is still in school - in fact, they went for a PCR test last night, but because they are asymptomatic at present, they are in class until the test results come back?

I think there are SOME families where there is a genuine need to know about positive Covid tests.

There is also the point that, without information, one has to assume the worst. I have to assume, in term time, because I come into contact with so many people at close quarters every day for very extended periods, I am always in danger of being infected but not yet symptomatic. So as a result, I don't visit my very elderly parents - at high risk even though vaccinated - in term time.

If we had better information - if children were required to test and we were aware of positive cases - and were allowed some mitigations that were scaled with the number of cases, then I would not have to consistently act as if the worst case scenario was true.

But there's also the making informed decisions about what you do.

If you know that there are several cases in your dc's form you might choose not take them to see your elderly grandmother in her nursing home, or ask your neighbour who is extremely clinically vulnerable to babysit while you nip out to the shops.

Well, I wouldn't, however I seem to notice a rather nasty attitude of "I'm allowed to therefore I will" in some areas.

Haven’t all children been taken off the CEV list anyway because the evidence says there not at risk. The ones eligible for vaccination who haven’t had it probably need to be careful but they also probably aren’t in mainstream education.
Covid rates are high at the moment, you’ve really got to presume that you may get it from anywhere at anytime and act accordingly.

I haven't RTFT but I wanted to say that in Leicestershire our schools have been back 2.5 full weeks and Covid if rifeamongst school aged children in my area.

I'm unsure about how many children tested positive via the school's own LFT testing during their first week back. But I do know a lot of children who have tested positive over the past 10 days- far more than at any other time since Covid hit.

I'm not aware of any children who are very very poorly. Most are feeling a bit rubbish, and seem to be recovering well.

My own thoughts are that this was inevitable but I do feel that schools need to be open having seen first hand the enormous damage that Covid lockdown measures have had on young people.

I am just amazed that the press are not talking about it, and I feel sure that there will be an almighty panic soon when other counties whose children went back to school more recently catch up with Leicestershire and any other early starters.

@Watapalava

They’re probs my waiting

Ons study from March proved that when followed up by PCR almost 60% were false positive

Many refused to do them in our school

It's a real shame that, despite being asked, @Watapalava hasn't come back with the link to back up referencing this ONS study.

DumplingsandStew

I am duplicating my post from another thread on which the same poster has made a similar claim. Ther IONS study may say that ON THAT DATE but it is irrelevant in the context of very high case rates:

"The statement here that there were 60% false positives on lfts at a particular point when cases were low has no relevance at the moment, when cases are high.

I'll illustrate with an example. The figures are not based on case data on any [articular date, but are for illustrative purposes.

For this illustration, I am going to assume that false positivity rates are 3 in 1000, and false negatives around 50% - approximately in line with initial Oxford University research in November 2020 when the lfts were self-administered by members of the public given a protocol, but simplified to make my Maths easier!

Let us take 3 scenarios:

1. True case rate is 4 in 1000, and everyone takes an lft.

The false positivity rate means that 3 of the 1000 will test positive at random. The false negative rate means that 2 of the 4 are not detected.

5 positives are found. 3 are false positives, 2 are true positives. 2 cases are missed.

1. True case rate is 40 in 1000

False positives are still 3 in 1000. False negatives mean that 20 of the 40 are not detected.

23 positives are found. 3 are false positives. 20 cases are missed.

1. True case rate is 400 in 1000 (OK, so this is unrealistically high, but it makes the point for the illustration)

False positives are still 3 in 1000. false negatives mean that 200 of the 400 are not detected.

203 positives are found. 3 are false positives. 200 cases are missed.

So when cases are low , false positives are an issue. When cases are high, as they are at the moment, false positives are much less of an issue than false negatives in terms of distortion of the data.

Either watapalava has not understood this, or they are deliberately selecting a point at which case rates were low to make a false general claim about the impact of false positives on lfts."

Just to clarify- the cases I mentioned a couple of posts down have been confirmed via a PCR tests. Our schools have asked anyone with a positive LF to go for a PCR to confirm.

@cantkeepawayforever

Good but one question. If the rate of cases is 400/1000, then there would only be 600 negatives in 1000 tests, so wouldn't that equate to just over 1.5 (which obviously you don't get, so call it 2) false positives rather than 3?

"here is also the point that, without information, one has to assume the worst. I have to assume, in term time, because I come into contact with so many people at close quarters every day for very extended periods, I am always in danger of being infected but not yet symptomatic. So as a result, I don't visit my very elderly parents - at high risk even though vaccinated - in term time."

Good point, well made.

A lot of kids had learned how to make a false positive by putting various substances on the test so tbh some of the problems with inaccurate testing were due to that! Could be avoided by parent redoing the test or supervising in the first place.
I agree they are worth doing when prevalence is high

[quote MargaretThursday]@cantkeepawayforever

Good but one question. If the rate of cases is 400/1000, then there would only be 600 negatives in 1000 tests, so wouldn't that equate to just over 1.5 (which obviously you don't get, so call it 2) false positives rather than 3?[/quote]
Yes, I apologise for that. It doesn't make a huge difference to the absolute numbers, but I did over-simplify, for which I am sorry.

To be more precise:

When cases are 4 / 1000, the number of false positives is very near to 3 (but not quite, because it is 3 / 1000 and we have only 996 true negatives)

When cases are 40 /1000, the number of true negatives is 960, so again saying that the number of false positives is 3 over-states it slightly.

When cases are 400 / 1000, the number of true negatives is now only 600, and so, as Margaret says, the number of false positives is lower, at just under 2.

It doesn't affect the overall conclusion, which is that at high case numbers, false positives are a small (and slightly reducing) issue in terms of understanding the data, whereas when case numbers are very low, they are a much more significant complicating factor.

None reported where I am.

Before the local media was reporting on year groups sent home rather than individual cases (except in march 2020).

I kind of agree. They are not vaccinating the children, so why make a fuss if they get a positive case. The kid is at home isolating.

It just makes for sensationalist reporting.

Plus the more you test people, the more positive cases you will find...