Face-to-face course: the explanation of “no crack” made by a contagion expert at school

After a weekend of intense debates between the demand of certain sectors for the presence in the schools of the city of Buenos Aires and the prosecution by the government of Buenos Aires, the question generated crossed arguments amid an escalation of coronavirus infections.

In this context, Axel rivas, professor and director of the School of Education at the University of San Andrés, posted a thread on his Twitter account “to avoid falling into the crack”. He analyzes the state of scientific literature on the impact of school closings on the reduction of coronavirus infections, which is why President Alberto Fernández ordered the DNU to suspend attendance for fifteen days.

Studies show mixed results. It is not true that the literature agrees that “closing schools does not reduce contagion” and neither does the reverse “said Rivas, who studies comparative education systems and policies.

Of the 40 studies reviewed by Walsh – and others – from 2021, the specialist published, “the biggest problem is isolating the ‘school closures’ variable from the other measures.” “Whoever has been most successful in achieving this goal (Matzinger & Skinner, 2020) shows a significant impact in reducing contagion and deaths.”

Face-to-face course: the Supreme Court has declared itself competent and will define the discussion

The doctor of social sciences also cited this year another study by Munday et al, which indicates that “the opening of schools in England has generated a sharp increase in infections”, as well as another study in Nature by Haug l last year, on measures to stop COVID in more than 200 countries: “Results: School closures are the second most effective measure to reduce contagion.”

Meanwhile, he mentioned another study by You Li published in The Lancet and carried out in 131 countries, which “This shows that closing and opening schools has a big impact on the decrease and increase in COVID”, and also another by Auger and others which shows “the high impact of reducing contagion with the closure of schools in the United States”.

Next, Rivas explained the rationale for its publication and the “partial” conclusions that could be drawn as a result of these studies, and what other countries have done with similar or even lower infection numbers. “There is ample evidence to indicate that in contexts of high circulation of the virus, there is a greater risk that schools will spread contagion and vice versa: low risk when there are no strong waves of contagion,” said he analyzed.

(7/20) There is ample evidence to indicate that in contexts of high viral circulation, the risk of contagion in schools is higher and vice versa: low risk when there are no strong waves of contagion. This article from Ismail et al (2020) in The Lancet is essential: https://t.co/SbnkT3hKtI

– axel rivas (@ arivas7) April 19, 2021

“Another study in the United States shows something similar (with 20 daily cases per 100,000 population, schools are increasing community contagion, CABA currently has over 150). There are also studies which show that contagion decreases a lot with strong mitigation and surveillance policies, as in the case of North Carolina, ”and he added the study published in Pediatrics.

Many publications, said the director of the School of Education at the University of San Andrés, “indicate that the contagion is more important outside the school than inside the school. This is why strong global quarantines appear to be more effective than isolated school closures from other measures ”.

What other countries have done

“That’s what almost every country that has seen new waves has done: closing schools with strong quarantines to stop the critical intensive care occupation. In 2021: France, England, Germany, Portugal, Chile, Uruguay, among others ”, published Axel Rivas.

Other countries, he said, “have maintained almost constant closures since 2020 such as Mexico or Brazil and almost all of Latin America currently has closed schools (with the exception of Nicaragua and Cuba) “.

Among the exceptions, he mentioned Spain, “which did not close with the second / third wave (but never had the number of cases coming from Argentina now or other neighboring countries) and Sweden, which closed the secondary “.

According to his analysis, he could not find any national or subnational education system that has maintained open schools “with more than a thousand cases per 100,000 inhabitants per week (as is currently the case in CABA)”.

In this sense, he clarified that “When there is heterogeneity of the results it is essential to look at study methods but even more contexts in which they were applied ”. “The vast majority of these studies were conducted in settings with lower viral circulation than what is currently happening at AMBA,” he explained.

On the other hand, he recalled that all the studies carried out in 2020 do not necessarily apply to the current reality with the incidence of new variants of the virus. “The new 2021 strains (Manaus and UK) are more contagious and virulent. We have fewer studies because they are very recent. It is difficult to apply the 2020 studies to a very different reality in 2021, ”he explained.

Finally, Rivas said, “All of this evidence does not mean that ‘schools must be closed.’ What he is indicating is a bit state of the art not to speak in a vacuum. Of course. , there is an abundant literature on the negative impact on psychological disorders, learning, inequality, economy and gender when schools are closed. All of this needs to be taken into account. This thread only analyzes whether the closure schools decrease the circulation of the virus or not ”.

(19/20) The proof is not an absolute truth. Science doesn’t work like that. We bring together all the possible pieces and add various dimensions: context, legitimacy of a measure, new strains, vaccinated population, side effects, etc. With that, moral dilemmas are debated

– axel rivas (@ arivas7) April 19, 2021

The evidence, he said, “is not an absolute truth.” “Science doesn’t work like that. We bring together all the possible pieces and add various dimensions: context, legitimacy of a measure, new strains, vaccinated population, side effects, etc. On this point, moral dilemmas are debated ”.

“Science, consensus and unity save lives. These consensuses are not reached with absolute radical positions. Complexity, only complexity helps us to get out of crises. Not the crack, ”concluded the education specialist.

AG / MC