B117 was more severe than wild covid, perhaps by 50%? This would mean more sickness in children.
Remember that phone call on BBC5live that was removed as fake news after pediatrics intervened?
The data was clear, its from a low base, but it means that without mitigations there will be more sick children than originally expected
Also means other countries werent warned,small number multiplied many times is still a large number, that's on Johnson mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/id…
FOI response on why government took Greenwich to court in December.
Jenny Harries "closing schools would increase transmission as they wouldn't be testing students"
Vs
Schools week 18th Dec "Testing to start on 4th Jan"
Examples of this failire to provide evidence to this FOI and several others
While the Treasury baulks at the cost of lost learning, Johnson seems comfortable with Delta spreading in schools which will result in more disruption.
Whatever this government says education clearly isn't a priority
What's the bet that as B117 was falling in the community, it was in education where B1.617.2 was increasing.
And whilst they knew this, they still went ahead with removing masks and suppressing the data instead of acting. #edutwitter#ThirdWave
I think the government is hoping to obscure scale of the issue in schools and gamble that hospitalisations are still low by 14th June, they will announce further loosening but keep masks in certain places so they can claim this is a sign of caution
Cummings said the Telegraph kept swaying Johnsons mind.
This is definitely the case with school policy,
Been charting how the disinformation leads policy every month
Skeptics➡️contrarian blue ticks➡️ Telegraph&CRG➡️Johnson changes policy #edutwitter
Media have been most negligent about schools policy complicit in dismissing safety concerns, unfortunately schools were barely mentioned in the meeting. Id like to know what Gupta and Henegan advised on schools.
March 2020 we called for schools to close
Herd immunity was the strategy and Gov spokesman said closing schools would be counter productive as it would reduce infection, transmission didn't just occur in schools it was vital 1/ #edutwitter#r4today
2/ When 1st lockdown was announced there was a mas scramble to define keyworkers, set down guidence for remote learning etc.
No preparatory work had been done because they had intended on keeping schools open throughout but impact on transmission was too risky
3/ From April 2020 the message suddenly changed from schools as essential vectors of transmission to gain natural immunity in low risk groups, to "children don't transmit" "transmission in schools is low" "school gates..."
1/🧵If education was a priority as government says, then they would be doing all they can to prevent the disruption caused by outbreaks and isolation.
So why haven't they invested in ventilation? Why scrap masks in secondaries?
2/ In fact the government seems comfortable with infections in younger age groups, the argument (ignoring long covid) is that children are low risk and the government’s aim is to keep down hospitalisation and deaths ie the NHS won't collapse from outbreaks in schools
But this wasn't their own priority it was "keeping schools" open, they and their client journalists keep saying how concerned they are by lost learning.
They are investing heavily in a national tutoring programme to show how much they are concerned