Should schools reopen?

[johneb]

This is a interesting view on the possible negative effects of social distancing for children by Leigh Dundas and Brian Shilhavy.
Children Have 0.00% Chance of Dying from COVID but are Harmed for Life by Social Distancing, Which has its Roots in CIA Torture Techniques

 

[Albion]

Weighing the alternatives, it seems clear that letting the kids attend school face-to-face is the best policy. With some safeguards, to be sure. The alternative has a serious downside that may well linger for a long time after the threat from the virus has gone.

 

[RushMAN]

Schools should reopen right now

 

[SkyWriting]

This is a interesting view on the possible negative effects of social distancing for children by Leigh Dundas and Brian Shilhavy.
Children Have 0.00% Chance of Dying from COVID but are Harmed for Life by Social Distancing, Which has its Roots in CIA Torture Techniques

But back to reality:

Analysis of pediatric COVID-19 hospitalization data from 14 states found that although the cumulative rate of COVID-19–associated hospitalization among children (8.0 per 100,000 population) is low compared with that in adults (164.5), one in three hospitalized children was admitted to an intensive care unit.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6932e3.htm

 

[bekkilyn]

However, keep in mind that children aren't the only people in the schools. There are many teachers, administrators, staff, etc. (many who are in very vulnerable demographics) that would also be exposed, so that needs to be weighed in as well.

 

[Halbhh]

To everyone:

2 important things to know or learn more about:

Research in South Korea points that older children spread the virus much more than younger kids:
Contact Tracing during Coronavirus Disease Outbreak, South Korea, 2020
"We also found the highest COVID-19 rate (18.6% [95% CI 14.0%–24.0%]) for household contacts of school-aged children and the lowest (5.3% [95% CI 1.3%–13.7%]) for household contacts of children 0–9 years in the middle of school closure."

One summary:
"A large new study from South Korea offers an answer: Children younger than 10 transmit to others much less often than adults do, but the risk is not zero. And those between the ages of 10 and 19 can spread the virus at least as well as adults do."
Older Children Spread the Coronavirus Just as Much as Adults, Large Study Finds

2nd:
These kinds of studies generally happened after schools were closed (it takes time for studies to be done), and so we may not yet have enough of a picture of what will happen with schools in session in person. We might get surprises there in coming months. Don't jump to firm conclusions that even the above result is the final word about the lower risks from younger children spreading the virus. It's only a tentative conclusion in my view.

But...on the other hand, for any household with school age teenagers in a household with adults that have vulnerabilities like obesity, being elderly, or other vulnerable groups, it would be prudent to do school remotely for these older kids especially when the virus is more prevalent. And only a very few states like New York have a truly low rate of prevalence right now. (NY has been very successful with precautions during the summer, and this is the current result of that summer success)

So, even if you like to poo poo caution, at least for those with teenagers + vulnerable household members, the risks are higher, and it would make sense to play it safe and go remote option even if someone claims you are just being chicken, etc.

Also teens are quite able to socialize by phone, text and Zoom, it appears to me (by direct observation). At least the ones I know seem quite good at it.