Hacker News Reader

Comment by Wowfunhappy | Hacker News Reader

While I would have made the point differently than the GP—your children are not at serious risk from COVID because of their age. (They are at some risk—life involves risk—but it’s low.)

The people seriously at risk from COVID are unvaccinated adults.

View on HN

If you define "risk" as "hospitalization," that's largely true. If you define "risk" as months or years of bizarre symptoms, reduced lung capacity, brain fog, etc., then children are at risk too.

But perhaps you don't care about that sort of thing.

Most studies I've seen show "long covid" to be pretty rare in children. Perhaps something like 5% of children who test positive have mild symptoms a month later. [1] This is somewhat consistent with other respiratory virus infections we've known about. [2] It's possible our risk tolerance is way different but this is personally an acceptable number for me not to worry about my own child.

[1] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/08/long-cov...

[2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31718695/

I don't think this represents most studies, but the far lower end. If we're going to cherry-pick, here's one which shows more than half of kids show at least one symptom 120 days out:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.23.21250375v...

My best guess is that it's around 10%-20% -- that's sort of in the middle where studies land.

I suspect a big part of the problem is which child and which COVID. I would speculate alpha, delta, mu, etc. all have different rates.

I think the second question is the distribution of symptoms. None of the studies are sensitive enough to pick up a 5% loss in IQ, lung capacity, or similar. Do some kids get it and others don't? Or is there a bell curve of symptoms, and we're picking up kids with the more extreme versions?

If it's a bell curve, it's pretty scary. All kids could be harmed to the level of e.g. lead exposure, and we wouldn't notice.

It’s not your place to decide the risk for other people’s children. No, not even you armchair virologist.

But it is my place to decide whether to go out for coffee.

To be fair, I think they're getting that advice from health experts. It is well known based on what our health professionals/experts have been saying that children are at a much lower risk.

However, I am an advocate for not letting the virus rip through the unvaccinated. I like people alive and I like our hospital systems unburdened.

The risk is higher than people want to admit: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/08/12/texas-rsv-covid-19-c...

Have you ever looked into how many children are hospitalized for the Flu?

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/highrisk/children.htm#danger

> CDC estimates that from the 2010-2011 season to the 2019-2020 season, flu-related hospitalizations among children younger than 5 years old have ranged from 7,000 to 26,000 in the United States.

This risk, by the way, may also be higher than people want to admit. I think it's nuts how many schools don't require the annual flu vaccine, not to mention how few Americans get said vaccine in general. That said, the very real risk of the flu—which can also cause long-term complications—does not cause us to all upend our lives, nor should it.

Covid is deadlier, I am not sure what you need to do to convince yourself but you should:

https://www.khou.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/verify-...

Sure, but your article also notes that:

> COVID-19 and the flu combined make up less than 1% of all pediatric deaths since the start of the pandemic in March of 2020.

Someone said upthread that "it’s not [my] place to decide the risk for other people’s children," and that is absolutely true in a broad sense! Unfortunately, I have to make decisions around (1) whether or not to vote for politicians who support re-opening schools, and (2) whether or not I go out to restaurants, shows, and social events.

So what? These are preventable deaths.

Car crashes are a leading cause of death in the US. Should we outlaw cars?

What about what? You can’t drive drunk.

> I am an advocate for not letting the virus rip through the unvaccinated. I like people alive and I like our hospital systems unburdened.

Right, and so this is where I disagree with the OP. I don't want anyone to die—I want everyone to be safe and healthy, including people who make bad choices.

However, I don't think that I have a responsibility to protect the people who insist on making bad choices. I absolutely did have that responsibility early in the pandemic, and I acted accordingly—I stayed home, I wore a mask, I turned down get-togethers, etc.

Now things are different. Vaccines are readily available in the US (and especially in the metropolitan New York area where I live), and any adult who is still unvaccinated has made an explicit decision to live dangerously. And I still don't want them to die—but I also want to go out with friends, and I'm not willing to give that up for the sake of people who can't be bothered to protect themselves!

That kids are not at risk is not true and borders on misinformation. You only have to look at Texas and Florida as control studies for that.

You don't have children.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com