Texas response to Corona virus

[RandomGuy]

Show me where 10-17 transmit the virus at rates that approach that of adults...stop being lazy.

the irony of you calling me lazy for not telling you what is in the links YOU POSTED. seriously, do you ever think about this before you post?

https://www.rivm.nl/en/novel-coronav...n-and-covid-19

This one, presents a huge problem, evidence wise, and also shows how sloppy you are.

The "infected contacts by age of patient" chart indeed shows zero infected contacts below age 19.

What you missed was the sample size in the chart above it.
Kind of hard to draw a sceintific conclusion of any size from a population of 12 incidents. Tentative, but not conclusive, because there is no indication in the data of any factors considered that might control for confounding variables.

Jeeez.

Moving on, and skipping the duplicate link.

[TSA]

the irony of you calling me lazy for not telling you what is in the links YOU POSTED. seriously, do you ever think about this before you post?



Some garbage from April, and not really a scientific paper. In fact it doesn't cite a single scientific refernce, other than a government statement about "Very young people"

Sloppy, but par for your ing spam linkathons. If memory serves "enfants" is never used for post-pubescents anyways. That would have clued you in, if you had any French proficiency.

So far we are batting zero for your statement that "children" are immune.

Looks like in your laziness you didn't understand your material well enough to understand that it meant "under 10".

Moving on.

So you're agreeing children under 10 should be back in school as they pose very little risk to infect and spread?

[RandomGuy]

An epidemiological survey of 1,340 people linked to primary schools... the children...

children aged between 6 and 11


"The study also confirmed that younger children

https://www.hpnonline.com/infection-...rimary-schools

References the same work from your other links. No statements about adolescents, and all the conclusive data is on "younger children".

Moving on.

[TSA]

the irony of you calling me lazy for not telling you what is in the links YOU POSTED. seriously, do you ever think about this before you post?



This one, presents a huge problem, evidence wise, and also shows how sloppy you are.

The "infected contacts by age of patient" chart indeed shows zero infected contacts below age 19.

What you missed was the sample size in the chart above it.
Kind of hard to draw a sceintific conclusion of any size from a population of 12 incidents. Tentative, but not conclusive, because there is no indication in the data of any factors considered that might control for confounding variables.

Jeeez.

Moving on, and skipping the duplicate link.

COVID-19 in Dutch households

Within a short time frame, RIVM National Ins ute for Public Health and the Environment set up a study to find out more about people infected with COVID-19 and their family contacts. In cooperation with GGD Utrecht, various families took part in this study. A total of 54 households took part up to mid-April, involving 239 participants, including 185 housemates. In this family-based study, there were no indications found in any of the 54 participating families that a child <12 years old was the source of COVID-19 within the family. The first part of the study has now been completed. The second part of the study is still ongoing. RIVM will be looking at the spread of the virus within families after a diagnosis of COVID-19 in a child. This approach gives us an even better opportunity to investigate how often an infection in children leads to further spread of the virus.

Schools and childcare facilities

Primary schools have been partially reopened since 11 May. The schools reopened fully on 8 June. Childcare facilities are also open again as of that date. Secondary education, special secondary education, practical education and newcomer education reopened on 2 June.

After double-checking with all 25 municipal public health services (GGDs), it has become apparent that there were no reports of possible COVID-19 clusters that had a link to schools or childcare facilities (or temporary childcare) before the schools closed on 16 March. After reopening the primary schools and childcare facilities, a few reports have come in regarding infections among employees at schools; RIVM has not received any reports of employees who were infected by children (based on data as of early June 2020). The reproduction number R, which represents the average number of new infections by a COVID-19 patient, has fluctuated below 1 since mid-March. This means that the spread of the epidemic is slowing down. After the partial reopening of primary schools and childcare facilities on 11 May, there was no sudden increase in the reproduction number (based on data as of early June 2020).

[RandomGuy]

So you're agreeing children under 10 should be back in school as they pose very little risk to infect and spread?

Moving the goalposts, deflecting and misdirecting when the holes in your theories and data are pointed out. Then expecting a direct answer from me, when you yourself show no compunction at all for the same courtesy.

"schools" and "children" become something different when the holes in your understanding of reality are pointed out to you.

Moving on, I do remember that statement, so I need to keep digging, I have not found what I remember reading yet.

[midnightpulp]

COVID-19 in Dutch households

Within a short time frame, RIVM National Ins ute for Public Health and the Environment set up a study to find out more about people infected with COVID-19 and their family contacts. In cooperation with GGD Utrecht, various families took part in this study. A total of 54 households took part up to mid-April, involving 239 participants, including 185 housemates. In this family-based study, there were no indications found in any of the 54 participating families that a child <12 years old was the source of COVID-19 within the family. The first part of the study has now been completed. The second part of the study is still ongoing. RIVM will be looking at the spread of the virus within families after a diagnosis of COVID-19 in a child. This approach gives us an even better opportunity to investigate how often an infection in children leads to further spread of the virus.

Schools and childcare facilities

Primary schools have been partially reopened since 11 May. The schools reopened fully on 8 June. Childcare facilities are also open again as of that date. Secondary education, special secondary education, practical education and newcomer education reopened on 2 June.

After double-checking with all 25 municipal public health services (GGDs), it has become apparent that there were no reports of possible COVID-19 clusters that had a link to schools or childcare facilities (or temporary childcare) before the schools closed on 16 March. After reopening the primary schools and childcare facilities, a few reports have come in regarding infections among employees at schools; RIVM has not received any reports of employees who were infected by children (based on data as of early June 2020). The reproduction number R, which represents the average number of new infections by a COVID-19 patient, has fluctuated below 1 since mid-March. This means that the spread of the epidemic is slowing down. After the partial reopening of primary schools and childcare facilities on 11 May, there was no sudden increase in the reproduction number (based on data as of early June 2020).

The first thing we do in science is control for environment and variables. I think I would like to see a comparable study from Mexico or Brazil and see how schools fared during the pandemic.

[ChumpDumper]

Masks don't work?

Who said masks are 100% effective?

Link it.

Show your math.

[ChumpDumper]

The first thing we do in science is control for environment and variables. I think I would like to see a comparable study from Mexico or Brazil and see how schools fared during the pandemic.

When Dutch schools partially reopened their 7-day moving average of new cases was under 300 and trending downward.

I am definitely in favor of partially reopening schools when Texas reaches that level.

[Winehole23]

When Dutch schools partially reopened their 7-day moving average of new cases was under 300 and trending downward
I am definitely in favor of partially reopening schools when Texas reaches that level.

Sorry, the plan is to briefly stall the collapse of the economy by making everyone go back to school. Public health won't be allowed to stand in the way of the politically determined timetable.

[tholdren]

Who said masks are 100% effective?

Link it.

Show your math.

How effective are they since you are advising?

[ChumpDumper]

How effective are they since you are advising?

fldren folds

[tholdren]

According to your earlier posts, up to 8% of infected kids could infect adults.

We have a lot more infected kids than any country you cited.

Do you see the disconnect in what you're saying?

No please, since you know math and you are citing the amount of kids who could infect adults please share how many kids will get it with masks and transmit with masks.

Or you just throwing out numbers because you dont know how to work that out?

[TSA]

RG thank you for finally putting some work into this. Let us proceed.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7147903/

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...45/6/e20200702

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2762130

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...T9DOMYjuP2dFA4

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...peds.2020-1576

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...tm_term=5_9_20

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article...iaa198/5766430

https://adc.bmj.com/content/105/7/618.abstract

https://www.eurosurveillance.org/con...;?crawler=true

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/apa.15371

https://www.phrp.com.au/wp-content/u...HRP3022007.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323087/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7311007/

https://ijponline.biomedcentral.com/...52-020-00844-1

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article...iaa424/5819060

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature06732

https://science.sciencemag.org/conte.../1481.abstract

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....08.20125484v1

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2766113

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2766114

[ChumpDumper]

No please, since you know math and you are citing the amount of kids who could infect adults please share how many kids will get it with masks and transmit with masks.

Or you just throwing out numbers because you dont know how to work that out?

It's their data TSA threw out, not mine.

Where's your math we've been asking you to show for the last month?

[tholdren]

It's their data TSA threw out, not mine.

Where's your math we've been asking you to show for the last month?

So you admit to gossiping. You didn't fact check just wanted to spread around.

Glad you argued yourself into another 180

[ElNono]

Mexican border towns are doing better because no one is going to Mexican border towns to seek better treatment.

https://khn.org/news/covid-19-overwhelms-border-icus/

Of course nobody is going there to seek better treatment, but Mexicans live there all the same. San Diego and Tijuana have just about the same population. Same with Monterrey and San Antonio, etc.

That article mentions a single hospital, which basically makes it anecdotal at this point.

[TSA]

The first thing we do in science is control for environment and variables. I think I would like to see a comparable study from Mexico or Brazil and see how schools fared during the pandemic.

Haven't found anything on Mexico or Brazil but here is China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and UK.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2766114

[RandomGuy]

Dang. I do remember reading it, in an article/interview of some kind.

Closest I could find on my own seemed to dovetail with everything else:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0962-9

Under 10 are almost never transmitting, 10-19 mildly so (based on clinical symptom rate, assumed to mirror transmittableness, 21% at a 95% confidence interval of 12 to 31%)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0962-9

They then go on to point out a very relevant bit of information, and a point I have made here before the models assume that schools close, reducing contacts.

Kids might not transmit at frequent intervals, but even infrequent things happen a lot when you have more chances for those things to happen.

To get around to your earlier question, because I am a better and more honest person than you are:

No. Even young kids should stay home from school. They may almost never transmit it between themselves and/or adults, but if you have tens of millions of them in clusters, day-in and day-out the math on that is pretty clear, it will increase the spread, even if close to zero, simply because of the sheer number of chances you are taking.

In places where the overall case load has gotten under control, I would be moderately comfortable, based on the science about really young kids, but overall, no, especially in hotspots. Given that there are about one adult per 12 pupils in most schools for younger kids, you are still forcing what? 29m/12=2.5m Two point five million adults who can easily spread it in close contact with each other?

[ChumpDumper]

So you admit to gossiping. You didn't fact check just wanted to spread around.

TSA's article and link are right there.

Not gossip.

You are not smart and lie about math.

[RandomGuy]

RG thank you for finally putting some work into this. Let us proceed.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7147903/

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...45/6/e20200702

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2762130

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...T9DOMYjuP2dFA4

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...peds.2020-1576

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...tm_term=5_9_20

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article...iaa198/5766430

https://adc.bmj.com/content/105/7/618.abstract

https://www.eurosurveillance.org/con...;?crawler=true

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/apa.15371

https://www.phrp.com.au/wp-content/u...HRP3022007.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323087/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7311007/

https://ijponline.biomedcentral.com/...52-020-00844-1

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article...iaa424/5819060

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature06732

https://science.sciencemag.org/conte.../1481.abstract

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....08.20125484v1

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2766113

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...stract/2766114

Another wall of text. Done the work. Not doing more.

I will assume it says the same as the other stuff. Children under 10 are not significant vectors, but still are vectors, and adolescents can much more easily contract and transmit than young kids.

It does not say it is safe for schools to open. You have not met your burden of proof.

[RandomGuy]

When Dutch schools partially reopened their 7-day moving average of new cases was under 300 and trending downward.

I am definitely in favor of partially reopening schools when Texas reaches that level.

Agreed. Trump cultists and the non-mask idiots will keep us from getting there.

[TSA]

Another wall of text. Done the work. Not doing more.

I will assume it says the same as the other stuff. Children under 10 are not significant vectors, but still are vectors, and adolescents can much more easily contract and transmit than young kids.

It does not say it is safe for schools to open. You have not met your burden of proof.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) presents arguably the greatest public health crisis in living memory. One surprising aspect of this pandemic is that children appear to be infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, far less frequently than adults and, when infected, typically have mild symptoms,1–3 although emerging reports of a novel Kawasaki disease–like multisystem inflammatory syndrome necessitate continued surveillance in pediatric patients.4,5 However, a major question remains unanswered: to what extent are children responsible for SARS-CoV-2 transmission? Resolving this issue is central to making informed public health decisions, ranging from how to safely re-open schools, child care facilities, and summer camps down to the precautions needed to obtain a throat culture in an uncooperative child. To date, few published data are available to help guide these decisions.

In this issue of Pediatrics, Posfay-Barbe et al6 report on the dynamics of COVID-19 within families of children with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction–confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in Geneva, Switzerland. From March 10 to April 10, 2020, all children <16 years of age diagnosed at Geneva University Hospital (N = 40) underwent contact tracing to identify infected household contacts (HHCs). Of 39 evaluable households, in only 3 (8%) was a child the suspected index case, with symptom onset preceding illness in adult HHCs. In all other households, the child developed symptoms after or concurrent with adult HHCs, suggesting that the child was not the source of infection and that children most frequently acquire COVID-19 from adults, rather than transmitting it to them.

These findings are consistent with other recently published HHC investigations in China. Of 68 children with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Qingdao Women’s and Children’s Hospital from January 20 to February 27, 2020, and with complete epidemiological data, 65 (95.59%) patients were HHCs of previously infected adults.7 Of 10 children hospitalized outside Wuhan, China, in only 1 was there possible child to adult transmission, based on symptom chronology.8 Similarly, transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by children outside household settings seems uncommon, although information is limited. In an intriguing study from France, a 9-year-old boy with respiratory symptoms associated with picornavirus, influenza A, and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection was found to have exposed over 80 classmates at 3 schools; no secondary contacts became infected, despite numerous influenza infections within the schools, suggesting an environment conducive to respiratory virus transmission.9 In New South Wales, Australia, 9 students and 9 staff infected with SARS-CoV-2 across 15 schools had close contact with a total of 735 students and 128 staff.10 Only 2 secondary infections were identified, none in adult staff; 1 student in primary school was potentially infected by a staff member, and 1 student in high school was potentially infected via exposure to 2 infected schoolmates.

On the basis of these data, SARS-CoV-2 transmission in schools may be less important in community transmission than initially feared. This would be another manner by which SARS-CoV-2 differs drastically from influenza, for which school-based transmission is well recognized as a significant driver of epidemic disease and forms the basis for most evidence regarding school closures as public health strategy.11,12 Although 2 reports are far from definitive, the researchers provide early reassurance that school-based transmission could be a manageable problem, and school closures may not have to be a foregone conclusion, particularly for elementary school–aged children who appear to be at the lowest risk of infection. Additional support comes from mathematical models, which find that school closures alone may be insufficient to halt epidemic spread13 and have modest overall impacts compared with broader, community-wide physical distancing measures.14

These data all suggest that children are not significant drivers of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is unclear why do ented SARS-CoV-2 transmission from children to other children or adults is so infrequent. In 47 COVID-19–infected German children, nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral loads were similar to those in other age groups, raising concern that children could be as infectious as adults.15 Because SARS-CoV-2 infected children are so frequently mildly symptomatic, they may have weaker and less frequent cough, releasing fewer infectious particles into the surrounding environment. Another possibility is that because school closures occurred in most locations along with or before widespread physical distancing orders, most close contacts became limited to households, reducing opportunities for children to become infected in the community and present as index cases.

Almost 6 months into the pandemic, ac ulating evidence and collective experience argue that children, particularly school-aged children, are far less important drivers of SARS-CoV-2 transmission than adults. Therefore, serious consideration should be paid toward strategies that allow schools to remain open, even during periods of COVID-19 spread. In doing so, we could minimize the potentially profound adverse social, developmental, and health costs that our children will continue to suffer until an effective treatment or vaccine can be developed and distributed or, failing that, until we reach herd immunity.16,17

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...ds.2020-004879

[ChumpDumper]

Agreed. Trump cultists and the non-mask idiots will keep us from getting there.

The last time our 7-day average looked like that was April 1.

[tholdren]

TSA's article and link are right there.

Not gossip.

You are not smart and lie about math.

so again you just passed information without fact checking. That is gossip.

Nice weasel move

[ChumpDumper]

in only 3 (8%) was a child the suspected index case

I don't dispute this number he keeps posting. My concern is that our new case count is proportionally many times that of Switzerland when they reopened and I'm not convinced schools will be set up like theirs.