Naaju Breaking News, Live Updates, Latest Headlines, Viral News, Top Stories, Trending Topics, Videos
[ad_1]
“The school is not contagious”, repeats whenever the head of government of Buenos Aires can Horacio Rodríguez Larreta. And he adds conclusively: “We rely on data”. Both claims are strongly questioned when one looks at the long list of surveys, conducted around the world, on the impact of face-to-face education in the context of the Covid 19 pandemic.
A full Twitter discussion thread posted by Axel rivas, director of the School of Education of the University of San Andrés, offers a tour of the main contributions on the subject, based on a compilation produced by Sebastian Walsh.
Axel Rivas has a full curriculum – President of the National Council for Educational Quality of the Ministry of Education of Argentina, Doctor of Social Sciences, UBA, Master of Social Sciences and Education, FLACSO, Argentina, Graduate in Sciences of UBA communications, doctoral studies at the Institute of Education, University of London, author of thirteen books on educational policy issues, South American editor of the magazine Educational Policy Analysis Archives Yes Konex Education Category Award for the period 2006-2016 – but above all it is a question of installing its contribution beyond the political “fissure” which affects so much the social response to the pandemic.
Rivas’ first conclusion is that “It is not true that the literature agrees that “ closing schools does not reduce contagion ”, nor vice versa.He also points out, in agreement with Walsh, that ‘the biggest problem is to isolate the variable’ school closures’ from the other measures’, but he notes that the most successful one ‘found a big impact in reducing contagion and deaths.
It goes through mainly European studies which reaffirm this correlation until reaching the now classic The Lancet, with data from 131 countries, which was known in recent days in Buenos Aires. Then it is the turn of investigations in the same direction carried out in the United States.
He also notes that “many studies indicate that the contagion is more important outside the school than within the school”, which led many specialists to conclude that “strong global quarantines seem more effective than the closure of schools isolated from other measures “.
But the politico-practical result of this conclusion in the face of the second wave was the reverse of that posed by those who oppose health restrictions in Argentina: the closure of schools was adopted alongside strong quarantines aimed at curbing the critical occupation of intensive therapy. . Rivas points out that this is what they did “in 2021: France, England, Germany, Portugal, Chile, Uruguay, among others”.
He is also careful to point out that “other countries have maintained almost constant closures since 2020 such as Mexico or Brazil and almost all of Latin America is currently with closed schools (with the exception of Nicaragua and of Cuba) “. A fact that calls into question the supposed ideological alignment with the measures adopted.
The only exceptions Rivas found “were Spain, which did not close with the second / third wave (but never had the number of cases from Argentina now or other neighboring countries), and the Sweden, which closed the secondary. “
Beyond the previous examples, Rivas points out that he could “not find any national or subnational education system that has maintained schools open with more than a thousand cases per 100,000 inhabitants per week (as is the case at CABA now)”. And he allowed himself an irony: “Thank you if they find it.”
The essential all-round yarn
(with their corresponding links)
State of the scientific literature on the impact of school closures on the reduction of COVID infections. Synthetic thread to avoid falling into the crack
1.Studies show mixed results. It is not true that the literature agrees that “closing schools does not reduce contagion”, nor vice versa. Here is a summary of the largest review of the literature by Walsh et al (2021):
https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.02.21249146v2…
Of the 40 studies reviewed by Walsh et al (2021), 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:
https: //ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7536875 / …
Among the most recent, this study by Munday et al (2021) indicates that the opening of schools in England has generated a sharp increase in infections: E
stimulate the impact of the reopening of schools on the number of SARS-CoV-2 reproduction in England, … Combine CoMix contact survey data with infectivity and susceptibility profiles to estimate the effect on the number of reproduction.4.
Haug et al (2020) nature study on COVID response measures in over 200 countries. Results: School closures are the second most effective measure to reduce contagion:
https://nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0…
Study by You Li et al (2020) in The Lancet in 131 countries shows that closing and opening schools has a big impact on the decrease and increase of COVID
https://thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30785-4/fulltext…
A study by Auger et al (2020) shows a strong impact of reducing contagion with the closure of schools in the United States
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2769034…
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 in the absence of strong waves of contagion. This article by Ismail et al (2020) in The Lancet this is the key:
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):
https://caldercenter.org/sites/default/files/CALDER%20WP%20247-1220-2.pdf…
9.
There are also studies which show that contagion decreases a lot with strong mitigation and surveillance policies. Case of North Carolina:
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2021/01/06/peds.2020-048090.full.pdf…10:43 am 19 abr. 2021ten.
Many studies indicate that the contagion is more important outside the school than inside the school. See Hobbs et al (2020):
https://cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6950e3.htm?s_cid=mm6950e3_w…
This is why strong global quarantines appear to be more effective than school closures isolated from other measures.
That’s what almost every country that has seen new waves has done: closing schools with strong quarantines to end a critical intensive care occupation. In 2021: France, England, Germany, Portugal, Chile, Uruguay, among others.
12.
Other countries 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).
13.
The exceptions were Spain, which did not close with the second / third wave (but never had the number of cases from Argentina or other neighboring countries) and Sweden, which closed secondary schools (see evidence of strong contagion among teachers in this country:
https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.13.20211359v2…
School closures and SARS-CoV-2. Evidence of partial school closures in Sweden To reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, most countries have closed schools, despite uncertainty as to whether school closures are an effective containment measure. At the start of the pandemic, upper Sweden
14.
I have not found any national or subnational education system that has maintained schools open with over a thousand cases per 100,000 population per week (as is the case in CABA now). Grateful if they find it.
15.
When there is heterogeneity of results, it is essential to look at the study methods but even more so in the contexts in which they have been applied. The vast majority of these studies have been performed in settings with lower viral circulation than what is currently happening in AMBA.
16.
In addition, the new 2021 strains (Manaus and UK) are more contagious and virulent. We have fewer studies because they are very recent. It’s difficult to apply the 2020 studies to a very different reality in 2021.
17.
All of this evidence does not mean that “schools should be closed”. What it indicates is a bit of the state of the art so as not to speak in a vacuum. I have recalled here my opinions on the measure of untimely closure of schools:
https://twitter.com/arivas7/status/1382713449445228546
18.
Of course, there is an abundant literature on the negative impact on psychological disorders, learning, inequalities, the economy and gender when schools are closed. All of this must be taken into account. This thread only analyzes whether or not school closures are decreasing the circulation of the virus.
19.
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
20.
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.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
