Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
thats be due to use of lektrik requiring written permisson from the local Shaman down West Wales way

and ill confirm those electric fences are rather stingy as wee Turnip once doubted some string could contain Uncle Bobs sheep and Dad telling me it was magic string so I had to touch it #70sparentingftw

Razorwire and rusted barbed wire is stingy, electric wire isn't

 Gitzbitah wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/13/politics/donald-trump-florida-coronavirus-reopening/index.html

I love the language in this article. It's professional, but doesn't miss a chance to use its diction to express its profound disappointment in how the crisis has been handled.

Well, my disappointment is with the American public. Certainly the governments of USA and Western countries were to blame for not locking down until March, when Asian countries did this in January and Italy was overrun by the virus. But it's July now, and safety measures are rather clear, with the latest being CDC's recommendation to wear face masks.The right wanted non-essential businesses to reopen, the left wanted to protest, and others wanted to party. This inevitably led to a rise in cases, partially from relaxation of lockdown measures, but also through disregard for safety. As much as government can issue policy, it's the people who choose whether or not to follow it, as shown by anecdotes on this board. While the crisis has been grossly mishandled, American citizens ignoring safety measures are also to blame -- and, I believe, would behave this way regardless of who was in office.

EDIT: Gonna post articles from NewsNow coronavirus search.

*****

As usual, "new study" means "needs more research".

Llama antibodies could be treatment for coronavirus, study shows
"The small size and the simpler structure of llama antibodies compared to antibodies in human blood allows for “redesign” in the lab."
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jul/14/llama-antibodies-could-be-treatment-coronavirus-st/

***

Coronavirus immunity can start to fade away within weeks, according to a new study which puts a 'nail in the coffin' in the idea of herd immunity

"Immunity to the coronavirus may disappear within months for many patients, according to a major new UK study which found that antibodies peaked three weeks after symptoms appeared, before gradually fading away. ... It is the latest study to pour cold water over so-called herd immunity — the theory that a population will become immune to the virus if at least 60% of people catch it. A similar study in Spain, which was published last week, found that just 5% of people tested maintained coronavirus antibodies. Fourteen percent of people who tested positive for the antibodies in the first round of testing did not test positive in subsequent tests carried out weeks later. ... Katie Doores of King's College London, the UK study's lead author, said the findings could be a sign that any future vaccine for the coronavirus would need to be provided regularly for people to maintain immunity."

Note that the above assumes a vaccine that works identically to natural antibodies. We're gonna need more llamas.

https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-immunity-start-fade-away-121036007.html


Coronavirus immunity from antibodies may only last months: study suggests

““Similar short-lived responses are seen against other human coronaviruses that predominantly cause only mild illness, meaning that we can be re-infected as time goes by and outbreaks can adopt seasonality. With the more serious, sometimes fatal, outcomes of SARS-COV2, this is troubling indeed,” Griffins said. “Vaccines in development will either need to generate stronger and longer lasting protection compared to natural infection, or they may need to be given regularly.”

As of Monday, there were 23 Covid-19 candidate vaccines in clinical evaluation globally, according to WHO.

“Even if you’re left with no detectable circulating antibodies, that doesn’t necessarily mean you have no protective immunity because you likely have memory immune cells (B and T cells) that can rapidly kick into action to start up a new immune response if you re-encounter the virus. So you might well get a milder infection,” Dr. Mala Maini, professor of viral immunology and consultant physician at the University College London in the United Kingdom, said in a statement also distributed by the Science Media Centre on Monday.

https://ktla.com/news/coronavirus/coronavirus-immunity-from-antibodies-may-only-last-months-study-suggests/

***

You’d Rather Get a Coronavirus Vaccine Through Your Nose : Some experts say a vaccine puffed in the nose would be better at protecting people from infection. But nasal vaccines won’t be ready right away.

"But vaccines spritzed through the nose or mouth would also tap into another set of immune cells that hang around mucosal tissues. The B cells that reside here can make another type of antibody, called IgA, that plays a large role in bringing gut and airway pathogens to heel. And T cells in this neighborhood can memorize the features of specific pathogens, then spend the rest of their lives patrolling the places they first encountered them. ... Much of mucosal immunity also remains mysterious to researchers. “A lot of what we know about the rest of the immune system kind of goes out the window when we’re talking about a mucosal site,” said Dr. Frances Eun-Hyung Lee, a physician and immunologist at the Emory Vaccine Center. There are also fewer tried-and-true technologies for developing nasal and oral vaccines, compared with injectables.

Well, if you gotta get booster shots, a nasal vaccine might still be preferable...!

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/health/coronavirus-nasal-vaccines.html

I think a little direction goes a long way, though - my state has declined to issue a statewide mask policy, but the county now requires them for adults in indoor public spaces. Despite the state cases spiking, our county's 2-week rolling average is on the decline.

I don't think the people in my county (which is fairly densely populated) are all that different from those in others... but a coherent policy we can all follow really helps!

The USA has had very mixed messages from local states saying one thing to counties saying another through to the President saying things utterly different.

This is before you even touch on the media presentation of information as well.


So its no surprise that people are picking and choosing; people go with what they think is right. Some might also be only paying attention to some information sources - someone following Fox news might be reacting very differently to someone following a different news outlet or information source.



This isn't unique to the USA, but I do get the feeling that the USA has had the most extreme divergences and differences between the various information sources.




This all goes alongside the issues every other country has, esp western ones or any nation where pandemics are basically something totally new to the majority of the population.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
While LA and San Diego have declared they will go to distance learning next year, the Orange County Board of Education voted to reopen public schools with no mask and no public distancing requirements. Politics over the lives of children, parents and teachers.

Orange County is a strange right-wing lipoma within southern California.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
For the UK

Hard to say for certain but the 7 day average suggests that we might be starting another rise of new cases per-day. Hopefully it might just be a blip or a very small rise and fall pattern. That said with all the general relaxations that have gone on it might be the start of a slow burn peak.

Deathrate seems pretty stable right now


Masks are going to be mandatory in 10 days time when shopping, I suspect the delay is to try and spread out the panic buying of masks somewhat.

The school question is a tough one, though (I say this as a parent). You've got kids in really critical stages of development on track to miss what could be a year and a half of school. This was probably discussed earlier, but the American pediatric society recommended that everything possible be done for children to physically attend school this year.

Maybe it's just a few days a week (which lets you, for example, alternate days and have only half the student body present at a time), and includes all possible social distancing measures... but not having any physical school for such a long period is going to have a lot of negative consequences for kids. Another possibility is the option of distance learning, so students with home conditions that make this work can participate that way, while those who do not attend in-person.

It's a tough balance - protecting teachers, family members, and the community, and still trying to educate. It would really help if politics could be left out of it, obviously, but that's tough to do in our current hyper-partisan environment... There are creative ideas to address these issues from a bunch of directions, but I'm afraid they're going to be drowned out.

I suspect the pediatric association has a political appointee at its head. They seem to weigh factors oddly.

In either event, OC is not offering us the option for distance learning. I have a heart condition and my wife had pneumonia 4 times in three years; pretty sure one year of home schooling is less detrimental to the kid’s development than “I caused mommy’s death.”

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I suspect the pediatric association has a political appointee at its head. They seem to weigh factors oddly.

In either event, OC is not offering us the option for distance learning. I have a heart condition and my wife had pneumonia 4 times in three years; pretty sure one year of home schooling is less detrimental to the kid’s development than “I caused mommy’s death.”

Predictably, that is very much NOT what the APA said. TL;DR, they would very much love for kids to be able to attend classes in person, but recommend that health officials make the determination on whether or not it's a risk of spreading the virus.

I have only read the APA statements quoted by the OC BoE to justify fully opening without masks or distancing measures.

Laughing Man, I can't see that discussion of it as it's behind the WP paywall, but the NYT one is free to read here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/30/us/coronavirus-schools-reopening-guidelines-aap.html

You can also see the direct recommendation here:

https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning-considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/

They of course say schools should be ready to adapt based on the level of viral transmission in the school and community, but after laying that out put this statement, with this section of the first sentence bolded in their document:

With the above principles in mind, the AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school. The importance of in-person learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020. Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation. This, in turn, places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality. Beyond the educational impact and social impact of school closures, there has been substantial impact on food security and physical activity for children and families.

Policy makers must also consider the mounting evidence regarding COVID-19 in children and adolescents, including the role they may play in transmission of the infection. SARS-CoV-2 appears to behave differently in children and adolescents than other common respiratory viruses, such as influenza, on which much of the current guidance regarding school closures is based. Although children and adolescents play a major role in amplifying influenza outbreaks, to date, this does not appear to be the case with SARS-CoV-2. Although many questions remain, the preponderance of evidence indicates that children and adolescents are less likely to be symptomatic and less likely to have severe disease resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, children may be less likely to become infected and to spread infection. Policies to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within schools must be balanced with the known harms to children, adolescents, families, and the community by keeping children at home.

Finally, policy makers should acknowledge that COVID-19 policies are intended to mitigate, not eliminate, risk. No single action or set of actions will completely eliminate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, but implementation of several coordinated interventions can greatly reduce that risk. For example, where physical distance cannot be maintained, students (over the age of 2 years) and staff can wear face coverings (when feasible). In the following sections, we review some general principles that policy makers should consider as they plan for the coming school year. For all of these, education for the entire school community regarding these measures should begin early, ideally at least several weeks before the start of the school year.

They then give a lot of specific recommendations for mitigation, which are well worth reading - they're not suggesting to have students physically attend without taking as many precautions as possible. Note that the main author is a pediatric infectious disease specialist, not a politician.

Again, I can't see the article you linked to but looking directly at the source and the NYT discussion of it makes it pretty clear... they want students to be able to physically attend in some form if possible. The negatives for many students outweigh the positives of distance learning, or distance learning may simply not be possible/practical for some. It's a complex issue that's unfortunately caught up in our stupid endless political divide and not getting the attention it deserves...

 Overread wrote:


Masks are going to be mandatory in 10 days time when shopping, I suspect the delay is to try and spread out the panic buying of masks somewhat.

Face coverings, not masks. There's a huge difference. You could cellotape a piece of tissue across your face and it would count. Plus if it is the same as public transport there's so many excuses not to wear one (including it makes you feel distressed) that it will be impossible to police. The Police are already saying this is the case before its even started.

My strong recommendation is that you avoid going into shops as much as possible. Too many people will either ignore the rules, wear something that just isn't effective or wear it in a way to make it ineffective. You can see this already in factories across the UK. Most localised outbreaks are at such sites. They mostly are following the guidance yet still these outbreaks occur. It's the ability to use items sensibly.

Cases are already flat lining and not dropping quickly in the UK, yet even in this circumstance we are still easing restrictions. The changes being implemented now are not based on infection rates but trying to get the economy moving again (you only have to look at the US as an example). People will start to use face coverings and think it will make them immortal and immune, stop thinking about keeping reasonable distances. There's a significant risk now that when the weather turns, people move indoors then infections will rise again compounded by the flu season and by Xmas we could be back in lockdown. What they really should do now is lockdown the country for another two months. Extreme, yes but it would go a good way to really squashing the infection. And also large scale mandatory randomised sampling of the populace (not targeted sampling where you find an infection) as this provides much greater certainty over the actual infections per population there is.

As such again I'd recommend, right now, is avoid shops, do everything online and delivered as much as possible.

The UK mask requirement gave me best laugh in a while. Predictable group is going ape over the issue. Out of all the things THAT is the thing they go nuts about?-)

Well when you have fellows who claim it's already vanished from UK no surprise...

 ced1106 wrote:


Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks (April)

You have to be very careful with quotes like this. There is no scientific basis for these statements only anecdotal circumstances. Most countries also introduced other stringent measures at the same time. Highlighting masks as the key factor is dangerous as it provides confidence in the masks when there is no evidence base for this. You are correct in that multiple factors likely contribute, but the masks can give confidence to ignore other advice (e.g. distancing) because people feel protected.

 RiTides wrote:
The school question is a tough one, though (I say this as a parent). You've got kids in really critical stages of development on track to miss what could be a year and a half of school. This was probably discussed earlier, but the American pediatric society recommended that everything possible be done for children to physically attend school this year.

Maybe it's just a few days a week (which lets you, for example, alternate days and have only half the student body present at a time), and includes all possible social distancing measures... but not having any physical school for such a long period is going to have a lot of negative consequences for kids. Another possibility is the option of distance learning, so students with home conditions that make this work can participate that way, while those who do not attend in-person.

It's a tough balance - protecting teachers, family members, and the community, and still trying to educate. It would really help if politics could be left out of it, obviously, but that's tough to do in our current hyper-partisan environment... There are creative ideas to address these issues from a bunch of directions, but I'm afraid they're going to be drowned out.

To add, one of public school's unspoken purposes is giving kids a chance to socialize with their peers and experience an environment with different rules/context/authority than their parents'. On top of the more obvious role of giving parents a chance to go to work.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
The school question is a tough one, though (I say this as a parent). You've got kids in really critical stages of development on track to miss what could be a year and a half of school. This was probably discussed earlier, but the American pediatric society recommended that everything possible be done for children to physically attend school this year.

Maybe it's just a few days a week (which lets you, for example, alternate days and have only half the student body present at a time), and includes all possible social distancing measures... but not having any physical school for such a long period is going to have a lot of negative consequences for kids. Another possibility is the option of distance learning, so students with home conditions that make this work can participate that way, while those who do not attend in-person.

It's a tough balance - protecting teachers, family members, and the community, and still trying to educate. It would really help if politics could be left out of it, obviously, but that's tough to do in our current hyper-partisan environment... There are creative ideas to address these issues from a bunch of directions, but I'm afraid they're going to be drowned out.

To add, one of public school's unspoken purposes is giving kids a chance to socialize with their peers and experience an environment with different rules/context/authority than their parents'. On top of the more obvious role of giving parents a chance to go to work.

I dunno, I always thought the biggest benefit of school was to get you acclimated to the routine of "Go somewhere you don't like, doing something that's mostly pointless, being told what to do by someone you don't like and may very well be an idiot." most of the school curriculum is pretty pointless. For the average student it's just, time filler. Getting you used to deadlines and such.

Kilkrazy wrote:Mask wearing to be compulsory in English shops from 24th July.

We all saw it coming. I'm glad I ordered my masks at the weekend.

Huh, there wasn't one before? With how much I read about people complaining about (lockdown) restrictions I'd have guessed that was already the case over there. I though Germany was really lagging behind in that regard when we only got compulsory mark/face covering at the end of April (in Bavaria) for stores and public transportation.

Whirlwind wrote:

 ced1106 wrote:


Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks (April)

You have to be very careful with quotes like this. There is no scientific basis for these statements only anecdotal circumstances. Most countries also introduced other stringent measures at the same time. Highlighting masks as the key factor is dangerous as it provides confidence in the masks when there is no evidence base for this. You are correct in that multiple factors likely contribute, but the masks can give confidence to ignore other advice (e.g. distancing) because people feel protected.

On the other hand the same "anecdotal circumstances" rhetoric also leads to people simply ignoring masks as they see them as useless, especially with the early signalling from health professionals against their usefulness (and the conflation of N95 and regular masks). They were looking for an excuse anyways.

From what I have read a high degree of simple mask wearing did correlate well enough with better results and fewer infections in Japan (where they had a few blunders in other corona policies) and South Korea (who did really well from the start) despite both countries having areas with very high population density where distancing is not alway easy. When mask wearing is one of the smaller burdens (next to distancing) we can try in regard to corona then I'd rather we try wearing masks even if they are (much) less effective than hoped for. At worst they can lead to people touching their faces less in public if they follow a strict protocol or just use them as a "reminder" to not do that while outside.

It's a pandemic and we don't have a "control group" or 100% independent variables.

 RiTides wrote:
Again, I can't see the article you linked to but looking directly at the source and the NYT discussion of it makes it pretty clear... they want students to be able to physically attend in some form if possible. The negatives for many students outweigh the positives of distance learning, or distance learning may simply not be possible/practical for some. It's a complex issue that's unfortunately caught up in our stupid endless political divide and not getting the attention it deserves...

TL;DR the APA saw what the Trump administration was doing with their advice, and hurriedly walked it back along with a "Jesus wept we didn't mean defund schools if they don't want to reopen, you monsters." You know, just in more polite language.

Do you have a link to a publicly available source? I think we might be talking about different things...

Their original recommendation is shown on their site, and as I said in my post politicization of the whole thing is a huge problem. "Defund schools" isn't part of what they're recommending, or what I posted.

I assume it was someone weaponizing it for political purposes, but again, that's different from what they're actually recommending (and why) regarding students attending school in-person in some manner, if at all possible.

Mario wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Mask wearing to be compulsory in English shops from 24th July.

We all saw it coming. I'm glad I ordered my masks at the weekend.

Huh, there wasn't one before? With how much I read about people complaining about (lockdown) restrictions I'd have guessed that was already the case over there. I though Germany was really lagging behind in that regard when we only got compulsory mark/face covering at the end of April (in Bavaria) for stores and public transportation.

One bias online is that I've noticed more people online seem to be more aware of corona risks and preventative/cautionary measures. Granted there's also a bias in that in the places I visit so it might be true to say more "geeky" people and forum users TEND to appear to be being slightly more aware/cautionary regarding Corona. Of course I'm leaving out big youth areas like Reddit and the like.

That said if you're also surfing in the same kind of circles then the image you get of people might be different to nations at large.

UK has oddly lagged in many things. It's odd because we almost seem to take the right path, but about a week or so later than everyone else at the very least; sometimes greater. I'm surprised that mask wearing wasn't one the first "unlock" phase steps in part of reactivating the country. Instead its appearing nearer to the end. Though we did have it earlier for public transport.

There are going to be issues with enforcing it, but at least making it mandatory is taking steps in the right direction. I would imagine that stores might well attempt to lead the way by wearing masks themselves (at the very least for staff on the shop floor who aren't behind a screen). I've noticed that when stores had people at the entrance, even if all they were doing was curtailing the flow into the store, people tended to be more aware/well behaved in the store. By and large its simply reinforcing and reminding people about the changes. Those who are going to cause trouble will cause it anyway.

 RiTides wrote:
Do you have a link to a publicly available source? I think we might be talking about different things...

Their original recommendation is shown on their site, and as I said in my post politicization of the whole thing is a huge problem. "Defund schools" isn't part of what they're recommending, or what I posted.

I assume it was someone weaponizing it for political purposes, but again, that's different from what they're actually recommending (and why) regarding students attending school in-person in some manner, if at all possible.

He's actually talked about/"suggested" withholding funding from schools that refuse to reopen in the fall. I believe the first mention was last week?

This is a big problem with discussing this without the ability to discuss the politics side of what is going on.

 RiTides wrote:
Do you have a link to a publicly available source? I think we might be talking about different things...

Their original recommendation is shown on their site, and as I said in my post politicization of the whole thing is a huge problem. "Defund schools" isn't part of what they're recommending, or what I posted.

I assume it was someone weaponizing it for political purposes, but again, that's different from what they're actually recommending (and why) regarding students attending school in-person in some manner, if at all possible.

In this climate it’s not “at all possible” to attend school safely. Whoever decided on putting out a statement with such obvious negative consequences has no idea what’s happening in this country. There was no way such a statement wouldn’t be abused.

I’m hoping we make masks compulsory too. Too many people here aren’t bothering with them and it’s a disaster waiting to happen.

Bob, have you read the links I shared above? This is not a one sentence headline, it's a detailed recommendation by an pediatric infectious disease specialist. I get that it's hard to trust things in the current climate, but this is one of the people worth listening to (i.e. a scientist / doctor).

Kanluwen, Ah that makes sense. It does not change the reasoning behind the recommendation, though. It's a shame it is being used as a political weapon, obviously, but it'd be nice to try to discuss the actual issues / science behind them.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I’m hoping we make masks compulsory too. Too many people here aren’t bothering with them and it’s a disaster waiting to happen.

Mandatory/compulsory masks doesn't stop people from "not bothering with them" when it gets emblazoned as "FREEDUMS!!11!!".
We have so frigging many people who refuse to wear them, despite it being mandatory in my state. Christ, you even can see it with actual law enforcement officers taking a political stance on it.

And just to add a bit of "how much worse can things get?", it's now been discovered that the White House has instructed hospitals to not report COVID numbers to the CDC first. instead directing them to the White House.

cody.d. wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
The school question is a tough one, though (I say this as a parent). You've got kids in really critical stages of development on track to miss what could be a year and a half of school. This was probably discussed earlier, but the American pediatric society recommended that everything possible be done for children to physically attend school this year.

Maybe it's just a few days a week (which lets you, for example, alternate days and have only half the student body present at a time), and includes all possible social distancing measures... but not having any physical school for such a long period is going to have a lot of negative consequences for kids. Another possibility is the option of distance learning, so students with home conditions that make this work can participate that way, while those who do not attend in-person.

It's a tough balance - protecting teachers, family members, and the community, and still trying to educate. It would really help if politics could be left out of it, obviously, but that's tough to do in our current hyper-partisan environment... There are creative ideas to address these issues from a bunch of directions, but I'm afraid they're going to be drowned out.

To add, one of public school's unspoken purposes is giving kids a chance to socialize with their peers and experience an environment with different rules/context/authority than their parents'. On top of the more obvious role of giving parents a chance to go to work.

I dunno, I always thought the biggest benefit of school was to get you acclimated to the routine of "Go somewhere you don't like, doing something that's mostly pointless, being told what to do by someone you don't like and may very well be an idiot." most of the school curriculum is pretty pointless. For the average student it's just, time filler. Getting you used to deadlines and such.

LoL how is science, art, math, literature, PE and gak like that useless lol.

 RiTides wrote:
Bob, have you read the links I shared above? This is not a one sentence headline, it's a detailed recommendation by an pediatric infectious disease specialist. I get that it's hard to trust things in the current climate, but this is one of the people worth listening to (i.e. a scientist / doctor).

Kanluwen, Ah that makes sense. It does not change the reasoning behind the recommendation, though. It's a shame it is being used as a political weapon, obviously, but it'd be nice to try to discuss the actual issues / science behind them.

I read it. I think you are misunderstanding me, though. There is a lot of nuance, and an awful lot of “maybe” statements, but the main takeaway statement was the bolded one, which is being used right now by real people to completely ignore all of the safety recommendations and nuance in favor of “open now”. Then there’s that “we’ve not seen a lot of evidence of children asymptomatically carrying it, therefor go ahead and assume they can’t” paragraph. None of the bullet points preceding that were addressed locally. No one n power is inclined to follow the hard recommendations when they can cherry-pick statements supporting their politics and convenience. The entire statement is worded in such a way that this result was inevitable. We’ve seen this approach used before, so whoever wrote that statement, unless they were purposefully undermining all responsible state governments, was woefully ignorant of the current situation.

If the APA statement was meant to help children, it has instead had the opposite effect regardless of original intent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It would be like the person in charge of your kids deciding to skip all the directions on how to attach and use bungee cords, where to jump safely, and what to do if there’s an injury, and then pointing at the paragraph that says “with all that in mind, there’s no reason children shouldn’t be able to jump off bridges safely” as the reason the district must now throw all children off bridges.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And every day we have more and more cases of young people, even children, who were asymptomatic developing lingering medical conditions or suffering neurological damage.

That seems like blaming scientists for politicians faults, imo...

As for children, when I get time I can link you to some studies but the percentage that are affected themselves is extremely low. The bigger concern is, obviously, transmission, but more studies are showing that that is also much less than was thought initially.

But yeah, I get that it's being misused by the usual suspects... doesn't mean it should be ignored for its merits, though.

 RiTides wrote:
As for children, when I get time I can link you to some studies but the percentage that are affected themselves is extremely low.

Does this take into account the newer information coming out about the lasting damage to organs in adults who only suffered mild symptoms or were even asymptomatic?

Because whilst kids may be more likely to be asymptomatic, that is not a lot of comfort if you are setting them up for lifelong lung, kidney etc. damage.

Not only that but, we are forgetting we will still have adults in the school who can give it to, other adults
Distance learning only for the time being. Kids can make up skills with playdates with other parents who are isolating and gak or make it up later.
I would rather have a generation of introverts then a generation of kids with lung problems.