Read on Twitter
1/ Thread: Today @halfon4harlowMP chaired the Education Committee meeting on the science behind schools being included in lockdown.
It was supposed to look at the evidence behind the decision.
Full notes of the meeting are here
https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351469264088260610?s=19
It was supposed to look at the evidence behind the decision.
Full notes of the meeting are here
https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351469264088260610?s=19
2/ I was worried the moment the witnesses were announced, no epidemiologists, no virologists, just the same people who have consistently claimed transmission in schools is low and there is no greater risk to education workers. https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1350145900702789633?s=19
3/I was expecting the same stock answers from a limited range of older studies and a lack of acknowledgement of the incredible difficult and unsustainable conditions we faced in December.
I wasn't disappointed as it opened with the phrase "A balance of risks"
I wasn't disappointed as it opened with the phrase "A balance of risks"
4/ Halfon early on stated that the evidence shows, Transmission is not an issue in schools, impact of school closures is low and that closures may have no effect on transmission.
At no point was observable impact of half term mentioned by anyone.
Was a repeat of DfE greatest hits
At no point was observable impact of half term mentioned by anyone.
Was a repeat of DfE greatest hits
5/ What suprised me was the amount of recent studies that weren't referenced, there seems a reliance on a small number of studies, and value is weighted towards those that fit the government narrative. https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351474081506484224?s=19
6/ There were a lot of caveats
"Uncertainty over role of transmission"
"Not enough data"
"Evidence isn't clear"
But then they cling to the challenged findings of a few studies to back up some strong statements that media will portray as facts (and already are)
"Uncertainty over role of transmission"
"Not enough data"
"Evidence isn't clear"
But then they cling to the challenged findings of a few studies to back up some strong statements that media will portray as facts (and already are)
7/ There were also a few statements to explain the evidence they were relying on that I would have questioned. There wasn't anything in the way of cross examination or probing into the evidence.
Also no questioning of previous statements that now appear wrong
Also no questioning of previous statements that now appear wrong
8/ Viner explaining why transmission will be low in primary and early years also said these students are "more likely to be asymptomatic, which means they are likely to be less transmissible"
When did asymptomatic mean less transmissible?
@DrZoeHyde https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351473662612926466?s=19
When did asymptomatic mean less transmissible?
@DrZoeHyde https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351473662612926466?s=19
9/ "Don't know if its schools or community transmission" is a constant theme, no mention of the ONS positivity surveillance data
Is there a high level of social mixing currently going on with early teens?
My rebellious yr11 lads werent even going out much https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351473802467799040?s=19
Is there a high level of social mixing currently going on with early teens?
My rebellious yr11 lads werent even going out much https://twitter.com/SchoolsWeek/status/1351473802467799040?s=19
10/ Viner said a systematic review of community transmission was needed, Harris said genomic contact tracing was needed.
Why haven't they done this already?
Why ignore the genomic tracing done in South Korea and other countries?
Because they contradict the DfE narrative?
Why haven't they done this already?
Why ignore the genomic tracing done in South Korea and other countries?
Because they contradict the DfE narrative?
11/ Viner explained his belief community transmission was the cause because "schools are quite contained, with good mitigations in place transmission can be reduced"
Good mitigations? DfE has ignored nearly ever single SAGE recommendation, the statement doesn't represent reality
Good mitigations? DfE has ignored nearly ever single SAGE recommendation, the statement doesn't represent reality
12/ Harris: early SAGE modelling shows "not a significant driver of large scale transmission"
This must have been a very early SAGE paper, late spring their modelling showed schools had a large impact on RO
See how old this is https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1263824155234971649?s=19
This must have been a very early SAGE paper, late spring their modelling showed schools had a large impact on RO
See how old this is https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1263824155234971649?s=19
13/ Now consider the purpose of this meeting
"Science behind closures"
So when impact of the new strain was raised I was quite suprised the answer was
"Early days, no significant evidence"
Infact most the evidence used in this meeting was gathered pre September
"Science behind closures"
So when impact of the new strain was raised I was quite suprised the answer was
"Early days, no significant evidence"
Infact most the evidence used in this meeting was gathered pre September
14/ Which is why thr lack of a NERVTAG witness us just confusing.
Shouldn't a meeting about lockdown include those who wrote the report that recommended it?
They also made recommendations specifically for schools, this wasn't mentioned https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1344679914084118530?s=19
Shouldn't a meeting about lockdown include those who wrote the report that recommended it?
They also made recommendations specifically for schools, this wasn't mentioned https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1344679914084118530?s=19
15/ Halfon moved onto "weighing up harms"
Data for this comes from a range of survey evidence, a lot more studies have been used here, 75 compared to the 10 they mention on transmission.
There are serious concerns about MH that I share but I think the causes are more varied.
Data for this comes from a range of survey evidence, a lot more studies have been used here, 75 compared to the 10 they mention on transmission.
There are serious concerns about MH that I share but I think the causes are more varied.
16/ Key survey was
2017 1/9 children had MH problems
2020 1/6 children had MH problems
Not certain on the survey details, doesn't explicitly link to pandemic
Viner says "can't say pandemic has caused this but its likely"
I agree but it won't just be school "closures"
2017 1/9 children had MH problems
2020 1/6 children had MH problems
Not certain on the survey details, doesn't explicitly link to pandemic
Viner says "can't say pandemic has caused this but its likely"
I agree but it won't just be school "closures"
17/ Loss of loved ones, family finances, fear of infection and infecting others, exam and grade uncertainty etc all sorts of issues will be impacting different students in different ways.
Also student MH issues have been on the rise for years, this does need a long term plan
Also student MH issues have been on the rise for years, this does need a long term plan
18/ There are some good suggestions that every school should have a MH practitioner but there was a claim schools are already benefitting from governments new MH funding and initiatives
Are we?
Are we?
19/ On returning Harris says risks will be very low, due to current measures and LFTs, they are "very accurate...with provisals"
Apparently 2 LFTs a week is as good as a PCR, no evidence was asked to back up this odd statement. https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1349816883776774148?s=19
Apparently 2 LFTs a week is as good as a PCR, no evidence was asked to back up this odd statement. https://twitter.com/karamballes/status/1349816883776774148?s=19
20/ As we have come to expect Harris's reassurances fall apart almost as soon as they come out of her mouth. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jan/19/ministers-set-to-halt-plans-for-daily-covid-tests-in-english-schools?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
21/ Which brings us to the reason I think #JennyHarrisResign should be trending.
I lost track of how many times everyone in the meeting stated educators are at no greater risk.Over and over again they all agreed on this,relying on the ONS study which was reported to the regulator
I lost track of how many times everyone in the meeting stated educators are at no greater risk.Over and over again they all agreed on this,relying on the ONS study which was reported to the regulator
22/ Its almost like this meeting was timed to take place just before the ONS released new data on schools.
Data that showed that the risks for educators do appear to be considerably greater https://twitter.com/MaryBoustedNEU/status/1351593582906531844?s=19
Data that showed that the risks for educators do appear to be considerably greater https://twitter.com/MaryBoustedNEU/status/1351593582906531844?s=19
23/ Harris also believes that no additional measures are needed when schools return, current measures plus LFTs will be fine.
New strain doesn't need extra measures just enforcing the ones we currently have.
This is worrying
New strain doesn't need extra measures just enforcing the ones we currently have.
This is worrying
24/ If we return to December conditions, we will return to December growth rates in school age students, as Hancock said this spread into other age groups and there will still be many at risk individuals not yet protected by vaccines
25/ Asked about masks Harris says where social distancing isn't possible in places like corridors then masks should be worn, doesn't seem to realise there is no social distancing in classrooms
26/ Yet she did say the same measures that keep other workplaces safe will keep schools safe, but she's just supported the current school measures which aren't as rigorous as most workplaces!
Its nonsensical
Its nonsensical
27/ There plenty more but those are the main ones off my chest.
Summary
Transmission not an issue
Staff not at risk
LFTs good
No need for any extra measures even in light of the new strain
No need to prioritise staff vaccination
Summary
Transmission not an issue
Staff not at risk
LFTs good
No need for any extra measures even in light of the new strain
No need to prioritise staff vaccination
28/28 And not a single mention that they refuse to tell us how many workers have died.
Everything is fine, nothing needs to change, really is a worrying attitude for them all to take.
The meeting was 2 hours spent in an echo chamber.
END
Everything is fine, nothing needs to change, really is a worrying attitude for them all to take.
The meeting was 2 hours spent in an echo chamber.
END
