Waiting for data before frightening kids, parents and the general public about variants, children and schools is important. They deserve this.
It has not been well practiced across the board - and given todays @ONS data, it is particularly disappointing
1/
Many will remember (feels like a lifetime ago) a lot of concern about the Alpha variant (prev known as B1.1.7) being very transmissible or more severe in children, disproportionate to its effects in adults
It is more transmissible by everyone (including children) and may cause more severe disease
But once more, very early on we heard lots of stories on THIS variant being worse and more transmissible *particularly* in children, and schools
4/
Despite lots of anecdotes, there was no real data to support this issue
There were conspiracy theories about cover ups of terrifying data, accusations of public health officials, letters written galore, and general furore
5/
When PHE released some data, the analysts themselves were *very clear* that it could not point to the precise role of schools in wider community transmission due to the nature of how the data is collected
Time has passed, and it is quite clear now that as for Delta, as for all #SARSCoV2 before it
-Young adults transmission highest
-Teens transmission a bit more due to more mixing, but to a lesser extent
-Younger children transmission surprisingly low
7/
In fact, let's just take a moment to admire the primary school aged data
This is the least vaccinated group, with among the highest amount of social mixing, in school with no facemasks for 3 months, whilst other respiratory viruses have run rampant
It is quite extraordinary
8/
Anyway, this is an issue because the horse has bolted
Most people will never hear that it turned out there was nothing special about kids and this variant
They'll just remember the scare stories
It's very easy to terrify parents
It is very difficult to un-terrify them
9/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Vinay points correctly to the bias prone endpoint of self reported URTI symptoms and implies the entire difference between groups could be due to “the placebo effect”
The problem is, this is almost
certainly not a result of placebo
It’s detection or ascertainment bias
2/
Vinay describes as much in his piece, when he mentions different interpretations of vague symptoms between people with or without masks depending on their beliefs
Wear a mask and wake up tired? Probably nothing
Not been wearing a mask? Could be the start of something…
3/
The rationale behind this is that some have postulated PASC could be due to viral persistence - SARS-CoV-2 hanging around when it should have been cleared
Anti-virals might help clear the virus and resolve symptoms
2/
The evidence base behind this theory is far from clear, but given the general mess of evidence in the field this seemed like a reasonable trial
It could also serve as possible therapeutic diagnosis (if it works, it gives evidence towards the possible cause)
3/