Masks back in Classrooms in secondary schools.

[storminabuttercup]

Our LEA have reintroduced masks in secondary schools, it's out first experience of this as DC us year 7. I'm absolutely not anti mask, DC willing wear one in shops etc and when moving about in school but is upset this morning about having to wear one all day, I'm guessing they will get used to it soon enough but I feel so sad about the whole situation, these kids have been through so much. It also makes me wonder if this is now the step before back to home learning.
I know we need to control the virus I'm not even complaining I'm just venting that this bloody thing is still here.

@SapereAude It’s not like they’re my studies It’s just what the data show. And I haven’t said that vaccination snd mitigation’s aren’t necessary, they very much were (and still are in some situations). Ireland has masks and vaccinated children - Their cases and hospitalisations are currently increasing.

@noblegiraffe but you don’t have the data to back up your assertion that the majority of children aren’t developing antibodies/aren’t immune.

Ds has had masks all day since mid September. He's had covid so I was hoping that he'll avoid all the other stuff rife at school but he has D&V atm. Numbers were as low as 14/30 in some of his classes but things are more normal now.

I feel a little sad that he is to wear one while everybody else (including MPs) are generally not required to wear one. But he's never moaned so I won't tell him what I really think until the mask mandate ends because I don't want to put a downer on things when he's being a trooper.

I don't think it's a step before shutting them again. This is a cheap way for MPs to pretend that schools are "safe ".

but you don’t have the data to back up your assertion that the majority of children aren’t developing antibodies/aren’t immune

Do you think the data shows that all children who are infected are developing antibodies or do you admit that at least some are not?

I think the point about X% of kids have had it/got antibodies/immunity from previous infection is that at the start of September it will certainly have varied by geographical area (my guess is massively). Some places like London, Birmingham, Leicester, Bolton had much higher infection rates earlier in the pandemic, and while schools were open. Suspect their herd immunity was much higher than more rural places were by September 2021. That's also why covid cases over the last few months have been relatively low in the aforementioned places, but tearing through other areas like wildfire.

Do you think the data shows that all children who are infected are developing antibodies or do you admit that at least some are not?

The heatmap of infections by age shows that 10-14s are experiencing their first real wave ever, and that amongst 15-19s it is the second wave after a 6-9 month period. For the 10-14 year olds most would likely never have caught Covid before, so they wouldn't have antibodies. The 6-9 month period for 15-19 year olds suggests to me that they did have antibodies, which have naturally dropped off at a normal rate.

coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation&areaName=England

The 6-9 month period for 15-19 year olds suggests to me that they did have antibodies, which have naturally dropped off at a normal rate.

No, because the 17% figure was ever tested positive for antibodies between November and July.

The heat map isn't a great comparison from before Christmas to July btw as there wasn't routine LF testing in schools before Christmas so far more cases were missed.

No, because the 17% figure was ever tested positive for antibodies between November and July.

It's not that they had no antibodies. It's that their antibodies didn't meet the threshold for the test. That doesn't mean they aren't immune or cannot generate a quicker or more effective immune response.

There is no evidence (on this thread at least) that children aren't developing antibodies and aren't building immunity.

I still don't understand the pursuit of this point that some children don't develop antibodies....this is making a case for what exactly?

Some may not be (just as some adults do not). There are several studies showing that children develop lasting antibodies, even after mild infection. And again, not having antibodies above a certain threshold after infection does not necessarily mean that someone is not immune.

Perhaps you might believe it if an epidemiologist says it, Claudia?
(Although I expect not)

“Worth remembering that infection in children is not immunity. Many children don't seroconvert. Lot's of evidence showing lower antibody responses in children vs adults post-infection and faster waning of immunity. very important that exposure is not conflated with immunity.”

twitter.com/dgurdasani1/status/1455476023416565765?s=21

@Brickskithouse

I still don't understand the pursuit of this point that some children don't develop antibodies....this is making a case for what exactly?

I’m not entirely sure either - the continued need for masks/vaccination of children etc? (Even though countries with those in place have still recently seen a rise in cases)

@Ruffledcardigan

Complete tokenism. If they were that effective why did we lockdown again last year?

A useless mitigation.

Because they do work. People in pubs don’t wear them, nor do you when you go into your mates house for a cup of tea. This is where it spreads the most with no mask wearing, so that’s why they had a lockdown. Masks work.

@Brickskithouse

I still don't understand the pursuit of this point that some children don't develop antibodies....this is making a case for what exactly?

Yes it won’t change stance on masks and we’re vaccinating 12 and over already.

And there still isn’t evidence of higher reinfection posted from anyone.

If it were really that kids are not developing immunity, it would be super surprising and definitely headline grabbing in both mainstream and specialist media alike.

Regardless, everything that’s been published indicates that immunity is developed. This is in most ways for children a rather uninteresting virus.

Where does the worry stem from?

I’m not entirely sure either

Because you posted that 70-75% of kids had been infected and it was ‘too late’ to do anything.

But what meaning is attached to that figure?

Where does the worry stem from?

Passing it on to people for whom it isn't 'uninteresting' in the way that a short bout of D&V or a cold might be for those same people.

Anecdotal.. there were over 200 cases in my ds's school. Masks reintroduced then cases dropped.

Perhaps you might believe it if an epidemiologist says it, Claudia (Although I expect not)

Here's another (SAGE) epidemiologist who believes that immune responses amongst children are effective to plateau or decrease overall case numbers:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/covid-cases-to-fall-as-immunity-among-children-reduces-need-for-plan-b-say-experts-wfjvvl7xl

Perhaps you'll believe it @noblegiraffe (although I suspect not).

it would be super surprising and definitely headline grabbing

That seems a quite naive assessment of media behaviour during this pandemic, particularly of things that affect children.

Too late to stop them being infected when 70-75% already have been, yes. And Marsha is right, there isn’t evidence that there is a higher rate of reinfection in children. Not on this thread and tbh I haven’t seen evidence of that anywhere. As puppeteer said, most studies show that children do develop immunity after even mild infection. You can do a quick search on it if you like.

@RuleWithAWoodenFoot

Where does the worry stem from?

Passing it on to people for whom it isn't 'uninteresting' in the way that a short bout of D&V or a cold might be for those same people.

But older people have been vaccinated and that reduces their risk of serious illness so children (or anyone else) passing it on to them shouldn’t be as much of an issue. That was the whole point of the vaccines.

There is no evidence and no media or Twitter interest - which has not been suppressed thoughout - and yet it’s a strong belief that dc will be reinfected at higher rate

Based on what exactly?

And Marsha is right, there isn’t evidence that there is a higher rate of reinfection in children

Marsha hasn't provided any data as far as I can see, and as I said, thinking that reinfection data in children is going to be in any way reliable is quite odd.

I don’t need to

I’m not asserting a claim that is completely unfounded.

Not sure why someone would without any evidence but there you go.