How will schools be able to go back in September? (Continued)

vid36

Covid 19 cases recorded at 64 schools in the north since reopening.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54088398?at_custom1=link&at_medium=custom7&at_custom2=twitter&at_custom3=BBC+News+NI&at_custom4=C871F642-F28F-11EA-AF58-D38D96E8478F&at_campaign=64

meeeeh

Boggles wrote: »

No.

We will leave it there.

Also no one is buying your "I'm not a native speaker" nonsense anymore when you refuse to understand something that has been clearly explained several times.

It's actually not nonsense. I googled incidence if it's statistical term and I can't find anything. So the only option I would have is that infections among kids are increasing at three times more than they are for adults.

Because your claim that not many kids were sent for testing in spring could be easily explained that very few had severe enough symptoms to be tested. Which just means this isn't dangerous to vast majority of kids and it affects older population.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

So it's up to me to disprove baseless claims?

Cool.

I'll get right on that.

It’s up to you to prove your baseless claim that the poster you replied to, and now a corroborating source as made, that they were making it up.

The widespread agenda shown here is to imply the any school closures are related to the schools being opened and not children bringing it from elsewhere, and to attack anyone who challenges that narrative, even though, as yet there hasn’t been a school transmission. There will be, be patient, ye can jump all over that then as evidence of apocalypse

Boggles

meeeeh wrote: »

It's actually not nonsense. I googled incidence if it's statistical term and I can't find anything.

Well I didn't use that exact word.

But even still the first thing google throws up when you do a search.

the occurrence, rate, or frequency of a disease, crime, or other undesirable thing.

khalessi

meeeeh wrote: »

It's actually not nonsense. I googled incidence if it's statistical term and I can't find anything. So the only option I would have is that infections among kids are increasing at three times more than they are for adults.

Because your claim that not many kids were sent for testing in spring could be easily explained that very few had severe enough symptoms to be tested. Which just means this isn't dangerous to vast majority of kids and it affects older population.

It can also be explained by the fact very few kids were sent because at the time it was believed children could not get it. Also the parameters were different, and it was hard to get kids tested. My nieces only got tested because their parents had it and parents insisted.

Even now the idea that children do not get it or spread it being pushed hard here. Yes they get it and do not get as sick as adults but studies around the world show that kids spread it more than adults also that they may not have similar symptoms.

Recently a studdy suggested taking stomach pains and diarrohea into account when diagnosing children, "Dr Tom Waterfield, researcher from the Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine at Queen’s University Belfast and lead on the study said:

“Following the first wave of the pandemic in the UK, we have learnt that half of children participating in this study are asymptomatic with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and those with symptoms do not typically have a cough or changes to their smell/taste, with GI upset a far more common symptom.

“This study has shown that we may want to consider refining the testing criteria for children to include GI symptoms.”

https://www.qub.ac.uk/News/Allnews/UK-widestudyshowschildrenwithgastrointestinalsymptomsshouldbeincludedinCOVID-19testing.html

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s up to you to prove your baseless claim that the poster you replied to, and now a corroborating source as made, that they were making it up.

:pac:

No it isn't, you are doing it wrong.

If a poster makes a specific claim, it is up to them not me and certainly not you by trawling the internet for another baseless claim to back up the original claim.

Deleted User wrote: »

The widespread agenda shown here is to imply the any school closures are related to the schools being opened and not children bringing it from elsewhere, and to attack anyone who challenges that narrative, even though, as yet there hasn’t been a school transmission. There will be, be patient, ye can jump all over that then as evidence of apocalypse

Another swing and a miss I'm afraid.

Boggles wrote: »

Almost all infections of children have happened outside school, primarily because schools are only back a wet week or so.

The point is the rate of infection in this age group in reality has always remanded steady (before school opened), we just haven't tested so we don't know the real actual rate of infection in children.

Now that wasn't important really, because they would have been home anyway.

The problem arises when we base reopening plans on the narrative that shure kids don't get it, which according to our (false) stats they don't.

The reality is catching up, currently 3 fold though.

The data will be muddied again going forward, because people will blame the rate of infection on schools reopening, where this may only play a minor role.

It's why you need up to date clear data to inform decisions.

Tut Tut.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

:pac:

No it isn't, you are doing it wrong.

If a poster makes a specific claim, it is up to them not me and certainly not you by trawling the internet for another baseless claim to back up the original claim.

I didn’t trawl the internet, I happened to read an article being discussed on another thread, unlike many of those discussing it, and saw the corroboration of the op’s statement at the end. If you are going to claim someone is making something up, you do have a responsibility to backup your claim

meeeeh

Boggles wrote: »

Well I didn't use that exact word.

But even still the first thing google throws up when you do a search.

I didn't miss that. So of I use oe of other expressions your statement goes:

Now that they are, the frequency ratio is 3 to 1 compared to all other age brackets.

In other words they test positive 3 times as much.

meeeeh

khalessi wrote: »

It can also be explained by the fact very few kids were sent because at the time it was believed children could not get it. Also the parameters were different, and it was hard to get kids tested. My nieces only got tested because their parents had it and parents insisted.

Even now the idea that children do not get it or spread it being pushed hard here. Yes they get it and do not get as sick as adults but studies around the world show that kids spread it more than adults also that they may not have similar symptoms.

Recently a studdy suggested taking stomach pains and diarrohea into account when diagnosing children, "Dr Tom Waterfield, researcher from the Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine at Queen’s University Belfast and lead on the study said:

“Following the first wave of the pandemic in the UK, we have learnt that half of children participating in this study are asymptomatic with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and those with symptoms do not typically have a cough or changes to their smell/taste, with GI upset a far more common symptom.

“This study has shown that we may want to consider refining the testing criteria for children to include GI symptoms.”

https://www.qub.ac.uk/News/Allnews/UK-widestudyshowschildrenwithgastrointestinalsymptomsshouldbeincludedinCOVID-19testing.html

I'm aware of UK study, I'm not aware of the studies that claim kids spread it more than adults.

khalessi

meeeeh wrote: »

I'm aware of UK study, I'm not aware of the studies that claim kids spread it more than adults.

Apologies meant to say equally or as easily as adults

fingers typing faster than brain

iamwhoiam

I was listening to a GP interviewed a Claire Byrne radio show yesterday .
He said the testing criteria differs slightly depending on the age of the child
He said the younger the child the lower the risk of them spreading it .
Therefore the HSE could be recommending a different testing criteria in a schools depending on age of the children

Blondini

At least 40 cases associated with schools now in ROI.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

If you are going to claim someone is making something up, you do have a responsibility to backup your claim

Again you are doing it wrong.

The poster was asked repeatedly to back up their claim, they wouldn't / couldn't / didn't.

On the back of that I am perfectly entitled to think the claim was false.

What exactly is confusing you about that?

munchkin_utd

Blondini wrote: »

At least 40 cases associated with schools now in ROI.

out of 3277 schools and 544,000 odd pupils

yep, better keep the schools closed for such a massive number of infections (of which none seem to have been passed on)

Boggles

meeeeh wrote: »

I didn't miss that.

Well if you didn't and it clearly defines the word you chose in the context of the conversation, why are you confused?

irishblessing

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn’t trawl the internet, I happened to read an article being discussed on another thread, unlike many of those discussing it, and saw the corroboration of the op’s statement at the end. If you are going to claim someone is making something up, you do have a responsibility to backup your claim

You can't be serious. A corroboration from an un-cited journalist article for non-existent interview link that still hasn't been provided? This is a complete and utter joke.

PCros

Not sure if this has been posted yet...

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0908/1163965-coronavirus-schools-information/

khalessi

munchkin_utd wrote: »

out of 3277 schools and 544,000 odd pupils

yep, better keep the schools closed for such a massive number of infections (of which none seem to have been passed on)

Nobody suggested closing them apart from you. It is good to keep eye on data

khalessi

PCros wrote: »

Not sure if this has been posted yet...

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0908/1163965-coronavirus-schools-information/

Good info but they should also include gastro symptoms for children.

PCros

khalessi wrote: »

Good info but they should also include gastro symptoms for children.

True, but I don't think its prevalent enough to include. Probably not the worst thing as there is so much information out there.

JDD

So this is what I'm getting so far:

- We do know that children suffer with milder Covid symptoms then adults;

- We think we know that there are more asymptomatic children than there are asymptomatic adults. This is difficult to conclude because the asymptomatic children have been found through contact tracing (same as adults) but way less children have been sent for testing due to symptoms, so the percentage of asymptomatic children is disproportionately high. It's also complicated by the fact that we don't know for sure how many asymptomatic adults there are. What we need is a widespread study of a town or area to see how many asymptomatic adults there are versus asymptomatic children.

- We also need to know whether asymptomatic children are as likely to spread the virus as symptomatic children. Logic would state that a coughing and sneezing child would be more likely to spread it. However, it also appears that the contagious stage stretches to well before symptoms set in. So if you've caught a "bad dose" and go on to develop symptoms, are you more contagious during that 5 day window? Do asymptomatic people manage to douse the flame of the virus earlier, thus are only contagious for a shorter window, or shed less virus when they are contagious? There's so much we don't know - or maybe NPHET know it and aren't telling us.

- If it turns out that children are just as likely to catch coronavirus as adults are (and therefore there are lots and lots of asymptomatic children out there), and if asymptomatic children are just as contagious as a symptomatic adults, then we have a problem brewing. But that's two big ifs with a lot of conflicting studies and research.

- If only someone had done this already you say. Well, we have limited data from a number of European countries on schools who opened/never shut before ours. Now there's lots of anecdotal stories about Israel and Berlin and pockets in other countries where there have been swift outbreaks in schools. But - and I'm going on a limb here - I assume NPHET have reviewed the European experience very closely and concluded that any uptick in the infection rate in children is not enough to warrant keeping schools closed.

- What we do need to accept is that there will be class closures, multiple ones, every day. And that more children will get coronavirus - how could they not? And correspondingly, they will spread it upwards, ultimately to the over 70s population and we will have more deaths as a result of schools opening. It is a balancing act though, we don't know yet whether schools will be a tinderbox, or whether there will be a slower burn of infections upwards. It seems like a slower burn so far, when looking at the younger population infected during August.

- While every death is horrendous, schools will stay open as long as hospitals can cope with new arrivals. And if the slower burn theory is correct, schools are likely to stay open for the forseeable. What will really be the clincher is the flu infection rate. Get your jabs folks.

Blondini

munchkin_utd wrote: »

out of 3277 schools and 544,000 odd pupils

yep, better keep the schools closed for such a massive number of infections (of which none seem to have been passed on)

Where in my post did I suggest closing them?

Choose your battles carefully there chap.

wirelessdude01

khalessi wrote: »

Good info but they should also include gastro symptoms for children.

I think they do in The North.

PCros

Also no harm to post this...its a comic for kids who may be a little nervous if they need to get tested.

Handy to print off if anyone needs it.

https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-updates/partner-resources/getting-ready-to-go-to-the-test-centre-comic-.pdf

John_Rambo

khalessi wrote: »

Good info but they should also include gastro symptoms for children.

People don't send their kids to school with gastroenteritis.

Mind you, judging by the exceptional stupidity shown on this thread maybe they should include things like gastroenteritis, open wounds with blood flowing out of them, concussions, seizures that last two hours and decapitations on the list.

khalessi

John_Rambo wrote: »

People don't send their kids to school with gastroenteritis.

Mind you, judging by the exceptional stupidity shown on this thread maybe they should include things like gastroenteritis, open wounds with blood flowing out of them, concussions, seizures that last two hours and decapitations on the list.

Thanks for you wiseass post, i wasnt just talking gastenteritis, but stomach pains in kids.

Amd speaking as a teacher I have had plenty of kids sent to school with gastro but thanks for your input:rolleyes:

meeeeh

Boggles wrote: »

Well if you didn't and it clearly defines the word you chose in the context of the conversation, why are you confused?

Because you still don't make any sense.

wirelessdude01

John_Rambo wrote: »

People don't send their kids to school with gastroenteritis.

You would be surprised what some kids are sent to school with.

JDD

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

You would be surprised what some kids are sent to school with.

God, that's awful. Sending them in with a cold, yes (otherwise they'd be out for most of the year) but I'd never send in a kid with actual gastro. I know lots of parents are in difficult circumstances, work wise, but that's just not on.

khalessi

Well kiddo's swab came back negative thankfully. 24 hours from test to result