John2290 said:
SvennoJ said:
It would be nice if this turned out to be true
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/french-case-raises-questions-over-coronavirus-child-spread-1.4903652
A nine-year-old who contracted COVID-19 in eastern France did not pass the virus on to any other pupils at three ski-schools, according to new research that suggests infants are not large spreaders of the disease.
Through rapid intervention by health authorities, it was ascertained that the child, who only displayed mild symptoms, came into contact with 172 people while sick. All of those were placed in quarantine as a precaution, but none of them contracted COVID-19, not even the child's two siblings. By contrast, 64 per cent of those contacts tested positive for other seasonal illnesses such as flu. Authors of the study said that the case of the child could "suggest that children might not be an important source of transmissions of this novel virus."
An exception or maybe some hope? Of course what would be the safe age limit, and maybe her symptoms were simply too mild. Would it be the same for boys as for girls etc.
|
You really want those kids back to school ^^
|
And be a lot less worried about seeing different kids play outside together. Plus my kids would love to see their grand parents again and their nephew. They were all sleeping over there on Friday nights and playing there on Saturdays, every weekend until the new measures came into effect. It's not nice to tell your kids to keep distance to their grand parents when they come over to talk from a safe distance.
Idle hope probably, you still end up having to decontaminate your kids every time they come back home lol. The virus can stick on anything apparently. So if a (unknowingly) sick parent sends a kid to school with active virus on his clothes, back pack, school work etc which gets shared around, still no good.
It's odd anyway. Kids can get infected enough to show up on tests. Why can't they spread it (if they can't)
