I read this editorial from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, curious to determine whether it included the obvious reason that schools have been closed. It didn’t. It did, however, include this interesting snippet:
Many observers have said that schools should be the first public institutions to open, since child development is crucial to the future of the country. They point out that children are less likely than adults to catch the coronavirus, and kids are more likely to recover if they are infected. However, there is a related inflammatory disease that is affecting a small number of children and teens, and more information about this disease is needed.
It is my understanding that if folklore rather than science. The Kawasaki-like disease does not satisfy Koch’s first postulate—some of those with the disease have not tested positive for COVID-19. Consequently, characterizing it as related to SARS-CoV-2 is beyond present knowledge. IMO it is more likely to have multiple causes. It could even be a reaction to ingredients in hand sanitizers or antibacterial cleansers.
In an alternate universe the schools would never have been closed. They would have been kept open, staffed by teachers and staff under the age of 50 who don’t live with people over the age of 50.
Yup, we just coincidentally happen to have a surge in a Kawasaki like syndrome. What was that about Occam’s razor? Anyway, here is the working diagnosis definition. Folklore?
“An individual under 21 years presenting with fever, laboratory evidence of inflammation and evidence of clinically severe illness requiring hospitalization with multisystem (>2) organ involvement (cardiac, renal, respiratory, hematologic, gastrointestinal, dermatologic or neurological); and
No alternative plausible diagnoses; and
Positive for current or recent SARS-CoV-2 infection by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, serology or antigen test; or COVID-19 exposure within the four weeks prior to the onset of symptoms.”
Steve
Except that some of the cases diagnosed as MIS-C have not met those criteria which, as I noted, means that it doesn’t satisfy Koch’s first postulate.
If they dont meet the criteria then they dont have it. The problem is knowing if they really had exposure when there is so much asymptomatic disease. What has to be noted is that we have a never before seen syndrome popping up in numbers larger enough to be noticeable at the same time as a new widespread viral disease and the large majority did have Covid, have anitbodies or have been exposed.
Steve
BTW, steve, you probably should read the CDC’s case definition for MIS-C. It’s considerably broader than the case definition you quoted. At least as I read it
Kawasaki-like symptoms in the presence of just about any virus would satisfy the criteria which, as I say, is an express violation of Koch’s first postulate. Just one case without actual findings of SARS-CoV-2 would be.
You’ve got it backwards, steve. Occam’s Razor cuts in the opposite direction. All it takes is one case, not a majority or even a large number of cases, in the absence of a positive test for COVID-19, and COVID-19 is an extraneous factor. The impossibly huge coincidence would be two different syndromes emerging at the same time, one with COVID-19, the other without.
“All it takes is one case, not a majority or even a large number of cases, in the absence of a positive test for COVID-19, and COVID-19 is an extraneous factor.”
But as i pointed out, and you ignored, we dont know how to account for asymptomatic cases. Is it more likely the kids without known exposure had one we dont know about, or is it more likely that none of these are related to Covid?
Steve
I ignored it because it was a non sequitur.
As you know Koch’s postulates are rules for establishing a causative relationship between a suspected pathogen and a disease. The original form of Koch’s first postulate is now largely obsolete but a version updated for today’s knowledge still seems relevant and, well, some criteria are needed to establish a relationship between a pathogen and a disease.
As updated one would think it would be something like “nucleic acid sequences of the microbe must be present in all cases of the disease”. But, as the CDC case definition for MIS-C makes clear, the disease does not even require that. Therefore MIS-C should not properly be attributed to SARS-CoV-2.
Now as to your question as to why yet another new disease might be discovered now of all times, that’s pretty easy. They’re looking for it.