Careful, different things at work here. Children are immunologically naive to all viral infections, hence usually shed large amounts of virus because the viruses can replicate unhindered at first.
Thatās the main reason they are more infectious than adults e.g. with a common cold or usual strains of the flue. Adults have known these, and their immune system suppresses the attack.
Now think a virus which is new for everyone. Different setting. Other factors come into play. Hence, more research needed.
The UK has been headed downward for the last several weeks, while Brazil is going up every day, so itās not likely the UK is going to be back in the top spot any time soon.
The reason children are vectors of disease isnāt just their own individual infectiousness, but also because they are in close proximity to one another for long periods, creating conduits of infection between numerous different social (family) circles.
True, as stated by both me and docsoc above. I was just responding to your experience of being ill more often: children usually show stronger ability to infect others (of all ages) due to their own high virus concentrations.
This is the major part of the hubbub in Germany right now, because the might be less infectious in case of Covid-19. Might. If so, closing schools might (just might) be a disproportionate measure, because the side effects are really, really bad.
Secondary/tertiary infections at home happen more often than in all other circumstances, but the data until now - under the strong bias of closed schools and KiTaās, that is! - seems to indicate that children are rarely the ones carrying the virus in.
OK; with the ācarefulā I thought you were correcting me.
How far into the open-school experiment are you in Germany? Norway is a few weeks in now, and it is being hailed as a probable success, with few (maybe no) infections traceable to the schools . Weāve actually had more people aged under 19 here with the virus overall than Sweden, and they have almost twice the population and their schools have remained open throughout. I donāt know what kind of special protocols they have in their schools.
This canāt be answered for the whole of Germany, since education as well as health policies are on the BundeslƤnder level, and outlined even on lower level of admin. Approaches differ. Strongly.
Thatās an excerpt of example of measures:
Keep a distance of 1.50 meters, tables must be set accordingly
no touching or hugging
thorough hand hygiene (hand washing or hand disinfection)
coughing and sneezing into the crook of your arm
doorknobs not with your full hand if possible, but e.g. open with the elbow
regular ventilation
daily cleaning of the toilet rooms, for example
distance markings on the floor
The list goes on. And I completely lost track which Bundesland does what.
In general, some schools had to close again right away. Mostly, it seems to be working ok, but measures are taken: until now, no full classes (however, AFAIK two states have stated they want to go back to full classes even before the summer holidays?), etc., etc. Emphasising again, with strong regional and local variations in measures taken. And also strong differences in general infection activity between areas, and a generally low level of new infections.
The epidemic situation currently seems under control. The debates, however, donāt seem to be under control, which might very well lead to problems later on.
FTR, first hopes are there that we might even get no second wave, if we keep social distancing working and adapt to the situation (which includes of course the measures in schools and KiTas - hence the debates).
This seems to be the hope in Norway as well. The problem is that we still donāt know which measures have actually been effective, and which are just theater. also what tradeoffs are feasible. (EG, drop the quarantine but start requiring masks?)
I think thereās an important idea lost in that statement and lost to many bio wonks: the authorities had a frightening possible conclusion, and reacted with maximum caution. Basically, they were smart consumers of incomplete evidence.