Covid-19 is killing children at an astounding rate

[fredjr82]

How many Conservative News pundits would be calling for "re-opening" if we found a significant percentage of babies and children would die from this? At rates 2x worse than the 50-64 yr age group? (Because that's literally what CDC's data says right now).

If it is PMIS and it's been around for 8 weeks at this point (from the initial diagnosis) wouldn't we have a bunch of dead kids from 0-4 in this country? 8 weeks would allow for a couple of incubation periods (using your 3-4 week period) and a 6% mortality rate would certainly not go unnoticed by CNN and others. That first round of deaths would have happened around 6/1 and we would of had more and more moving forward. I'm just not seeing that information anywhere and I think we would.

 

[Joes Place]

So, conjecture. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

1600 dead children aren't "conjecture".

It's a very concerning statistic.

 

[pablow]

It makes sense, if they've gone back through the data, and found that these cases are far more prevalent than had been understood earlier.

Or, as I've now noted at least a dozen times, it is an error on their demographics data site.

Still - no anecdotal mention of such staggering numbers. Nobody on the ground noticed?

 

[Joes Place]

Still - no anecdotal mention of such staggering numbers. Nobody on the ground noticed?

Huh?

They literally started sending out warnings to look out for these symptoms a month ago.
WHO has pushed out a memo for people to watch and track it.

This isn't a "CSI" episode. Until people know what a specific syndrome is, they have no idea what to call it or categorize it as. As I've noted already for you, several times, CDC just updated this "raw data" on their site late yesterday. The number has been there for <24 hours.

Nobody "on the ground" is going to know what's going on in a neighboring hospital, let alone across town or across the country. That's literally why we have the CDC to collect and track this data.

 

[hawkboy76]

Surprisingly, I'm actually somewhat in Joe's corner here. The numbers he is reporting come directly from the CDC website, so he's not pulling them out of thin air. They are reporting 1500+ COVID deaths out of 26,000ish cases for 0-4 year olds, which does calculate to about a 6% case fatality rate. In my view, the infection fatality rate is probably much lower because there are going to be many young kids who get this, have very mild or no symptoms, and aren't tested, but even in this scenario, the #s are still pretty high, much higher than what has been reported previously about the threat of COVID to kids.

What I'm struggling to understand is why such a huge increase in the #s and why is literally nobody (aside from Joe) talking about this? I would CNN would be all over stories about "Babies and toddlers dying of COVID." Right now we have crickets from the media. As recently as a week ago, the CDC was reporting 13 total deaths for this age group. Now we have 1500? It's not adding up.

 

[Joes Place]

What I'm struggling to understand is why such a huge increase in the #s and why is literally nobody (aside from Joe) talking about this?

As I've noted, because CDC has quietly updated these numbers, and hasn't put out any context or press release behind them.

Again- this is a late-term condition/response to Covid-19 that has only become evident within the past month or so. Initially, it probably WAS very rare, because few kids had contracted or been exposed.

Now that we have more widespread dissemination of Covid-19 and kids are being exposed, 3-4 weeks (or more) later, we are seeing this uptick.

CDC cannot acquire those numbers UNTIL the specific condition is adequately described, physicians know what to look for and code it as. And, I'm sure with all that is going on, it's taken a few weeks to amass some of this data. It is startling to see the numbers increased this much, so fast but again, it is a backlog, and a re-classification of something that was not considered Covid-19 related until just recently.

They likely haven't been testing that many children, either. So, the 6% number will (hopefully) be inflated from the actual CFR, if they track more cases in children. Barely more than a month ago, this was presumed to not affect children at all.

That clearly is not the case.

 

[hawkboy76]

As I've noted, because CDC has quietly updated these numbers, and hasn't put out any context or press release behind them.

Again- this is a late-term condition/response to Covid-19 that has only become evident within the past month or so. Initially, it probably WAS very rare, because few kids had contracted or been exposed.

Now that we have more widespread dissemination of Covid-19 and kids are being exposed, 3-4 weeks (or more) later, we are seeing this uptick.

CDC cannot acquire those numbers UNTIL the specific condition is adequately described, physicians know what to look for and code it as. And, I'm sure with all that is going on, it's taken a few weeks to amass some of this data. It is startling to see the numbers increased this much, so fast but again, it is a backlog, and a re-classification of something that was not considered Covid-19 related until just recently.

They likely haven't been testing that many children, either. So, the 6% number will (hopefully) be inflated from the actual CFR, if they track more cases in children. Barely more than a month ago, this was presumed to not affect children at all.

That clearly is not the case.

Do you expect the CDC to issues some kind of explanation/clarification on this? I still find it odd that you appear to be the only person talking about it. There are huge numbers of journalists spending a tremendous amount of time researching and writing about COVID related issues. This is a massive spike in deaths among the most vulnerable in our population and nobody has noticed except you? I'm not criticizing you for noticing, I just find it very odd that it's not a story anywhere else.

 

[Joes Place]

Do you expect the CDC to issues some kind of explanation/clarification on this?

A jump from nearly "0% CFR" to "6%" in babies and toddlers?

I'd sure hope so.
Remember - Business Insider published a graphic based on a 2% number, that I was ready to call "BS" on. I wanted to look that info up, before reposting their graphic and story.

I found the CDC info that fully backed it up.....then 8-10 hours later, they updated the data to reflect even WORSE numbers. If that were an "error", I would think they'd have corrected it from the 2% statistics.

The scientist in me wants to give them the benefit of the doubt, in pushing out a clear memorandum on this that isn't overly fearmongering. But if the 6% stat is correct, there's not a whole lot of wiggle-room here.

The concerned scientist in me suspects that some at CDC understand exactly what this means, and they are being told to wait until "late Friday" to slow-roll something out, or do so with some other blockbuster news to shield this from the main news cycles. Meanwhile, people continue BAU, on the presumption this is "only an old people disease"....

 

[unIowa]

If this is true or even remotely close to being the correct CFR % then get ready for a lot of things to shut back down. Trumpers can get away with sacrificing old people but if they take the same casual approach to young children they will rightfully get eaten alive by the general if they even make it to the general election without parents of dead children taking matters into their own hand.

There is ONE very important rule of politics that must be followed: DON'T MESS WITH THE CHILDREN bc the children all have parents.

 

[Joes Place]

In my view, the infection fatality rate is probably much lower

This is 100% certainly true.

What IFR (do you think) is acceptable here?
If we're 2x more infections than cases, it's still a 3% IFR - Too High, IMO

5x? That pushes the IFR to around 1%. That still seems rather high if 1 out of 100 kids is dying from this.

The infant mortality rate - all causes, is allegedly 0.6%.

That's infants, not 0-4 yr olds. But I have to presume we really need to see this disease be below that number (about 1-in-200 odds of your kid developing lethal Covid or a lethal MIS-C response from it) before people will feel like taking their kids out and about. Something in that 1/200-1/500 range would seem "safe" to me. But not 1-in-16 or even 1-in-100.

Curious what others would set as a "safe" level of risk here.

And, again, this is (and has been) my point: we're dealing with a completely new disease we're getting hit with more and more surprises from, yet we seem to want to simply disregard it entirely and carry on BAU.

Remember: these CFRs and IFRs for children may not account for serious and long-term health effects some of them may experience. In healthy adults, those conditions can include renal failure, strokes, amputations, heart/lung capacity degradation.

We literally have no idea what the really long-term effects on children may be, which I'd think should scare the shit out of people to keep their damn masks on.

 

[Joes Place]

If this is true or even remotely close to being the correct CFR % then get ready for a lot of things to shut back down. Trumpers can get away with sacrificing old people but if they take the same casual approach to young children they will rightfully get eaten alive by the general if they even make it to the general election without parents of dead children taking matters into their own hand.

There is ONE very important rule of politics that must be followed: DON'T MESS WITH THE CHILDREN bc the children all have parents.

....and my hope is that this is NOT related to why this information has remained 'behind the scenes'....

 

[DooBi]

My wife is looking hard at online learning options for next year. 2 of our 3 kids have developmental disabilities which has been shown to have higher rates of death.

My prayers are with you.

 

[B1G]

Those poor children! Oops, I'm late for my abortion.

Stop the fake concern.

 

[dgordo]

I can’t figure out where the cdc is getting these numbers from. If you look at illinois, s state that was hammered by covid you see 1 death under 20 years old and New York shows 15 deaths under 20. Where are all these deaths coming from?

 

[Finance85]

Again, you're posting old information; this is now clearly being understood as a 3-4 or later week condition in response to Covid-19: exposure OR contraction.

I grabbed that from the current CDC website, using your link.

 

[Joes Place]

I grabbed that from the current CDC website, using your link.

....it's still 3-4 week old information. Is this too complex to understand that they haven't updated things yet? And that most of the data you find on their site specifically states that it is based upon "data as of April 30" or "as of May26"?

Welcome to June 24th. They just ballooned numbers from what had been reported on those days, to well over 1000+ more deaths in 0-4 year olds.

 

[Joes Place]

I can’t figure out where the cdc is getting these numbers from. If you look at illinois, s state that was hammered by covid you see 1 death under 20 years old and New York shows 15 deaths under 20. Where are all these deaths coming from?

Again- most states are reporting ONLY acute Covid-19 deaths.
As I've stated, I think CDC is now folding in the MIS-C deaths to the Covid numbers, because they now realize it is a Covid-related complication and mortality. The MIS-C cases are being reported separately, elsewhere. Because those kids were allegedly "recovered" from Covid 19 for around a month or so.

That's my best guess here. As I've noted, this is very strange. Which also makes it more concerning

 

[pablow]

I can’t figure out where the cdc is getting these numbers from. If you look at illinois, s state that was hammered by covid you see 1 death under 20 years old and New York shows 15 deaths under 20. Where are all these deaths coming from?

As of 6/23/2020 CA shows zero deaths under 5 years old. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/COVID-19-Cases-by-Age-Group.aspx

 

[hawkboy76]

Again- most states are reporting ONLY acute Covid-19 deaths.
As I've stated, I think CDC is now folding in the MIS-C deaths to the Covid numbers, because they now realize it is a Covid-related complication and mortality. The MIS-C cases are being reported separately, elsewhere. Because those kids were allegedly "recovered" from Covid 19 for around a month or so.

That's my best guess here. As I've noted, this is very strange. Which also makes it more concerning

Where are the MIS-C deaths recorded? I see a few articles here and there about a death or two here and there, but nothing along the lines of 1500 deaths.

 

[dgordo]

Again- most states are reporting ONLY acute Covid-19 deaths.
As I've stated, I think CDC is now folding in the MIS-C deaths to the Covid numbers, because they now realize it is a Covid-related complication and mortality. The MIS-C cases are being reported separately, elsewhere. Because those kids were allegedly "recovered" from Covid 19 for around a month or so.

That's my best guess here. As I've noted, this is very strange. Which also makes it more concerning

ny is only reporting 3 deaths from mis-c, illinois is reporting 0.

 

[srams21]

Again- most states are reporting ONLY acute Covid-19 deaths.
As I've stated, I think CDC is now folding in the MIS-C deaths to the Covid numbers, because they now realize it is a Covid-related complication and mortality. The MIS-C cases are being reported separately, elsewhere. Because those kids were allegedly "recovered" from Covid 19 for around a month or so.

That's my best guess here. As I've noted, this is very strange. Which also makes it more concerning

That is extremely concerning if true.

I hope this is just some data error. Anyone have access to some press that could somehow get a message to the CDC? @torbee maybe

 

[pablow]

Again- most states are reporting ONLY acute Covid-19 deaths.
As I've stated, I think CDC is now folding in the MIS-C deaths to the Covid numbers, because they now realize it is a Covid-related complication and mortality. The MIS-C cases are being reported separately, elsewhere. Because those kids were allegedly "recovered" from Covid 19 for around a month or so.

That's my best guess here. As I've noted, this is very strange. Which also makes it more concerning

That's been know for some time. It wasn't discovered last week. In fact, you been posting about it for months it seems.

 

[Joes Place]

That's been know for some time.

No. It has not.
A "month or two" is not a very long time to decipher a completely new condition. Particularly when it's a complication 3-4 weeks after (allegedly) clearing the disease.

 

[Joes Place]

That's been know for some time. It wasn't discovered last week. In fact, you been posting about it for months it seems.

Dr. Stephen Freedman, a child health and wellness researcher at the University of Calgary who’s leading an international study of COVID-19 in children, said that MIS-C is not yet a reportable disease in Canada, so national numbers when it comes to the condition are not known.

He does believe, however, that it will be soon, meaning doctors could soon have a better understanding of how prevalent MIS-C is among children with and without a history of COVID-19.

The Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) recently sent out an alert to Canadian doctors about the illness, stating that it has been found in children who have tested positive for COVID-19 and children who have tested negative, and can resemble toxic shock-like syndrome or Kawasaki disease.

In the U.S., at least 20 states and Washington, D.C. have reported similar cases. More than 100 cases have been recorded in New York alone, including three deaths.
​

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/more-clusters-of-a-rare-condition-are-popping-up-in-children-across-canada-1.4956155

You can presume the same is true in the US: as of the end of May (this was a May26/27 article), this was NOT a classifiable, reportable condition. Yet hundreds of reports of cases were noted as of back then. They were probably mis-classified as "Kawasaki disease".

And these cases have tracked local outbreaks, separated out 3-4 weeks. So, absent any reporting of cases, this has been building for about a month or two now.

And CDC is finally getting these cases categorized, which would explain why the "dump" of cases and deaths on their site yesterday. If it hasn't been corrected, or there isn't any formal explanation before Friday, then something probably bad is happening. Like, people aren't disseminating the information because of the negative press and possible panic it might cause, derailing "reopenings" considerably.

 

[strummingram]

Again- most states are reporting ONLY acute Covid-19 deaths.
As I've stated, I think CDC is now folding in the MIS-C deaths to the Covid numbers, because they now realize it is a Covid-related complication and mortality. The MIS-C cases are being reported separately, elsewhere. Because those kids were allegedly "recovered" from Covid 19 for around a month or so.

That's my best guess here. As I've noted, this is very strange. Which also makes it more concerning

Why aren't you on the phone with your subordinates (you don't have superiors)? You're killing more people by wasting time on this board.

 

[unIowa]

Those poor children! Oops, I'm late for my abortion.

Stop the fake concern.

Shoot yourself

 

[WorldSeriesChamps2015]

Shoot yourself

I definitely want my 1 and 3 year old to get it!!!!!!

 

[hawkland14]

Why aren't you on the phone with your subordinates (you don't have superiors)? You're killing more people by wasting time on this board.

This really is a good question. This would be the biggest breakthrough in this entire pandemic and @Joes Place seems to be the only one in the entire country(hell maybe even world) that has figured it out. Yet all he is doing about is screaming at people on HROT. You are one weird dude Joe.

 

[McLovin32]

So are you saying Joes Place is jumping the gun and going to start calling people stupid for not agreeing with him soon?

I just want to point out how funny it is that @hawkland14 liked this post. Yet he jumped the gun when he started the whole “Cops got Poisoned” thread and never acknowledged that he was wrong.


With that said, hopefully the numbers are off. This would not be good if young children are also a high risk.

 

[Joes Place]

I just want to point out how funny it is that @hawkland14 liked this post. Yet he jumped the gun when he started the whole “Cops got Poisoned” thread and never acknowledged that he was wrong.


With that said, hopefully the numbers are off. This would not be good if young children are also a high risk.

These same dipshits jumped all over me in March, when projections were >2000 deaths and pushing 200k cases by the end of the month. And I was "an alarmist" and "Trump hater".

Things like:

10,000 cases a day? You literally are making stuff up.

And:

Other than conjecture or wanting it to happen(you and Joe seem to be two on here who are always wishing for more) there is no reason to believe that is where we will be in three weeks. Our death rate is 1.3. Italy’s is 8.6. Why do keep comparing us to Italy?

(Now, we're many many times worse than Italy)

Good times. Now they're back doing the same shit, different day.

 

[LBoogie28]

This whole thread is fake news. I was told that no one healthy under the age of 60 dies from COVID.

 

[Joes Place]

This really is a good question. This would be the biggest breakthrough in this entire pandemic and @Joes Place seems to be the only one in the entire country(hell maybe even world) that has figured it out.

No, as I've stated for you, Business Insider posted the graph of the CDC data in a news story. Someone posted that graph, and I didn't think it looked right, so I went digging for the CDC source. I found it.

Seems like none of the news media sources want to touch it. Why? Don't know, but if the numbers are correct, I suspect it's going to set off more concern, and probably bigger stock drops. And maybe that's why.

Or, maybe the numbers aren't verified, and CDC isn't responding to news sources who want to write something up on it. Either out of "being too busy", or, again, because they want to delay this.

The numbers are on their site; they've been there coming up on 24 hours, soon. That there is no clarification on this rather large and significant jump for 0-4 yr olds seems concerning. Maybe dead children are "funny" to you; I'd rather make sure people with small children are made aware of the risks.

 

[Titanhawk2]

Posted in other threads, but figured this should be front and center.

Unless CDC has posted data in error, the demographics site indicates a 6% Case Fatality Rate for those 0-4 years old.

It seems this is now only being understood, based on a late-developing syndrome in children that occurs weeks after they've contracted and "cleared" Covid19. This is known as MIS-C, and it was thought to be "rare", but if CDCs data are accurate, it's a lot less "rare" than was perceived.

CDC's numbers, updated late yesterday, are:
1582 deaths
26,045 cases

6% CFR.

https://www.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics

Here are several links to MIS-C, and the latest info:

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/covid-19-symptoms-in-babies

https://www.jems.com/2020/06/09/covid-19-in-kids/

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...depth/mis-c-in-children-covid-19/art-20486809

https://www.cdc.gov/mis-c/

https://www.uptodate.com/contents/c...e-in-children?topicRef=127488&source=see_link

https://www.who.int/news-room/comme...ome-in-children-and-adolescents-with-covid-19​

This is simply NOT an "old people disease" anymore. It's impacting children at a very high rate. I'm somewhat confused as to why this has not been conveyed in the media much yet, perhaps to not cause a bigger panic and "hurt our stocks".

Are we really so enamored with our stock portfolios, vs conveying a danger to public health here?

Again, the 6% number was literally updated late yesterday, so that is "raw" data, and we may have clarifications on this soon. Or corrections. But the implication is that this MIS-C is much less "rare" than was believed, and keeping your kids away from this stuff until we can identify anti-inflammatory medications or vaccines would be highly advisable.

EDIT: This was the BI graphic shown yesterday, which indicated a 2% CFR for 0-4. CDC's updated data implies 6%, which makes this MORE lethal for young children, than for 50 yr olds

When I read this graphic I thought it must be wrong, so I looked their data up, and the numbers they used from the CDC site at the time were roughly 482 deaths and ~22,800 cases, or about 2% CFR - the graph was correct. That was updated to the numbers above late yesterday, pulling the CFR up to an even more eye-popping 6%.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-death-rate-us-compared-to-flu-by-age-2020-6

I highly doubt this age range is being highly tested, that there are very few asymptomatic positives because they are not being tested

 

[Joes Place]

This is apparently "common enough" and serious enough that they are issuing new guidelines for treatment w/in the past week:

https://www.rheumatology.org/Portal...-Guidance-Summary-MIS-C-Hyperinflammation.pdf

If you are a physician or pediatrician, I'd make sure others are aware of this.

​

 

[Joes Place]

How the syndrome impacts kids

From the first accounts of an unusual illness impacting children in the United Kingdom in late April, MIS-C “has really exploded in the last month,” DeBiasi said.

At Children’s National Hospital, an analysis of more than two dozen patients with the syndrome found a median age of 9, while COVID-19 has more severely impacted the hospital’s older children and very young populations.

Another key difference: Just 35% of these kids had underlying conditions, lower than the rate among regular COVID-19 hospitalizations for kids.

Those who meet the diagnosis for the new syndrome are under 21 and have either tested positive for COVID-19 have been exposed to someone who had or likely had the disease in the four weeks before symptoms began. These children have no alternative plausible diagnosis and present with fever, evidence of inflammation, and a severe illness requiring hospitalization or with multisystem organ involvement.

This illness has different long-term complications, too. Of the kids studied at Children’s National, 38% had some sort of cardiac abnormality from the get-go, she said. For instance, some had an aortic aneurysm, or a ballooning of the coronary artery which can lead to scarring, blocked blood flow and higher risk of a heart attack later in life.

As with COVID-19, there’s still a lot of unknowns with MIS-C, DeBiasi said.

“That’s really a big black box and a very important one to fill,” she said.​

https://www.centerforhealthjournali...rting-novel-covid-19-syndrome-afflicting-kids
Great. So when your kid survives, they can have an aortic aneurysm that predisposes them to major problems later on (if you don't know what that is - trust me, it's bad).

2 in 5 end up with some form of cardiac abnormality.

Remember - kids that balloon up aortic aneurysms today don't count as Covid deaths....

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Infants under 12 months are less developed than a toddler which matters when discussing tracking a new disease.

Uhhh...yeah....so? If you break it down further, it just concentrates it in a more specific demographic. Which is fine and all but if the narrative is that small children never die from COVID this- if true - effectively blows that up regardless of the 0-4 demographics.

 

[Black Lab Hawk]

Uhhh...yeah....so? If you break it down further, it just concentrates it in a more specific demographic. Which is fine and all but if the narrative is that small children never die from COVID this- if true - effectively blows that up regardless of the 0-4 demographics.

Did you just not read any of the thread on purpose?

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Did you just not read any of the thread on purpose?

How exactly does anything in the thread in any way change what I posted? I'll ask again, IF children under 4 actually were succumbing to a secondary consequence of COVID why does it generally matter what the exact demographics are? TIA

 

[FAUlty Gator]

COVID is like the Planned Parenthood of viruses.

 

[McLovin32]

I just want to point out how funny it is that @hawkland14 liked this post. Yet he jumped the gun when he started the whole “Cops got Poisoned” thread and never acknowledged that he was wrong.


With that said, hopefully the numbers are off. This would not be good if young children are also a high risk.

@hawkland14