I notice the elephant in the room - that educators caused this problem in the first place by aggressively calling for shutdowns, masking and all the rest of it - isn’t mentioned at all in that article. It’s all about “solutions” and government money to pay for it. Well, guys, how about if you hadn’t fucked vulnerable young people over in the first place?
A lot of people need to lose their jobs and be sent to work in Burger King instead of being allowed to influence the fate of the next generation. Or preferably go to jail, but I can’t really see it happening because there is no law that covers what they’ve done.
Didn’t you hear about the amnesty? 
Oh, they’ll get their amnesty, I’m sure, simply because they can’t be charged with a crime. You’ve got to hand it to them, really. The creativity expended in finding ways to destroy people’s lives while skirting around the edges of the law was really quite something. Smart people.
Smart maybe, but not terribly wise.
Said who?
Hmmm maybe I’m wrong but the way I see it it’s not because they immune system wasn’t developed because of the use of masks (I thought they were useless for things as small as viruses!), but because the distribution of cases, from none to too many at once, hence the lack of beds.
I appreciate that this is the official position that’s being put forward now. However, Strep A killed virtually no children in the past, occasionally a seriously immunocompromised child. The children who are dying now were otherwise healthy.
It’s not just about masks. It’s more about social distancing of children for three years. Lack of contact etc
Also the gutting of health services, which happened almost everywhere and is affecting people across the age range. It’s not just “lack of beds” but also a shortage of staff; a significant number were either fired or walked away.
This is the first explanation that came to my mind, based on logic and what we have seen in other cases.
Can´t talk about this, I’m no expert on this or anything else, but again, isn’t it a case of cases distribution, and lack of resources?
Not saying that this isn’t true, but that first contact can lead to the same situation no matter when it happens…?
Strep hits all kids. It hasn’t suddenly increased in the number of kids it hits. They just haven’t been able to gradually build up immunity to it as they normally do.
I know it hits all kids. What I said is that after a period of not hitting them, too many have been hit all at once.
The point is otherwise healthy kids are dying. That hardly ever happens.
Something that hardly happens, stops happening for 2-3 years, and then starts to happen again, probably at higher rate. Is it possible this is because deaths are accumulated this current period or time? Not saying that’s all what is happening, but sounds like a plausible explanation.
It’s because the children have weakened immune systems as a result of social distancing measures.
The authorities are trying to suggest other reasons, which appear plausible, but are bullshit.
IDK what authorities have said. What do you think about what I said? is it bullshit? and if so, why?
Makes sense. Rates are five times pre pandemic though so it is more than making up for lost time if you are right.
9 kids dead so far. More than died from covid in the first year.
In 2017 it was 4 deaths under 10yo.
Would like to see some historic tabulated data per country.
Strep doesn’t kill healthy children.