Can either of you explain why the occupational data (e.g., from Sweden, pre-lockown UK) on the relative risk to teachers when schools are open is not extremely relevant here? It's endpoint data on something we actually want to know.
-
In that paper, living alone has the highest point estimate for a risk, significantly higher than having an elderly co-resident: https://su.figshare.com/articles/preprint/Residential_Context_and_COVID-19_Mortality_among_the_Elderly_in_Stockholm_A_population-based_observational_study/12612947/1 … We don't understand the social mixing and other factors from the results of the paper.
Living alone also increases non-COVID mortality, so may be due to frailty. Those not living alone have the same lower non-COVID mortality, irrespective of the age of family members. But, potential bias if those living with children live with fewer adults.
-
-
It would nice to have a study like this just for infections, not mortality. (Like the occupational study, the first one I linked to.)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Perhaps there are fewer adults in those households. In Geneva, seroprevalence in teens aged 10-19y is on par with adults aged 20-49y https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31304-0 … If teens don't infect each other much, how could they have such high infection rates?
-
Ed, here are the seroprevalence numbers from Spain. Consistent with younger children being less likely to infect others, although there are many unknown parameters. E.g. the two directions may have different probabilities.pic.twitter.com/iveljpID31
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.