Where's the equivalent European study that says no effect?Lmao. Kids theoretically lose a month and a half of their life expectancy due to school closures and it's a Holocaust, hilarious. Ever wonder why European school closures didn't have the same effect? Any chance you might realize that we could be mitigating this right now but nobody gives a shit?
Mask, vax, avoid crowds. It's actually pretty simple. Love the idea that just because I'm probably gonna die in a traffic accident means I don't need to watch my weight though. Clown logic.
Those don't stop you from getting covid, if they did, we'd be at 0 covid easy. Diet is the leading cause of death, why would your chances of death from traffic accident be greater than diet?
I'm not saying it's the best study or anything. To think having kids out of school isn't having some major negative effects is pure naivety. Lots of kids never came back to school, we lost thousands and thousands of kids. I don't think you need an official study to tell you those kids life expectancy greatly dropped. And for what, covid is less deadly than the flu for them.My eyebrow was raised immediately by the writers making up-front value judgements and policy 'suggestions', even in the introductory section.
...and the very first response involves a researcher pointing out several analytical errors, which dramatically affect the results.
But most of all: this entire study is based on the correlation of lower educational attainment and lower life expectancy. It then assumes that lost years of education due to school closures will have the same impact. Do you see the problem here...? Correlation is not causation! Lower life expectancy and lower educational attainment are primarily correlated due to economic factors-- poverty, deprivation, etc.
We lost thousands and thousands of kids that never returned to school. Also, the school closures very disproportionately effected minority kids. The ones that needed school the most were not allowed in school.Fuck's sake.
1) This assumption only works if the loss of education is permanent. The reality is that a lot of any deficit will be caught up.
2) Education correlates with all sorts of factors - socioeconomic status, wealth, etc. Someone with a worse education tends to get a worse job: but it's the bad job that docks life years more than it is the education (e.g. problems affording healthcare). But there is no clear evidence that a nationwide disruption of education actually causes people to get worse jobs. People are still getting into college or university at about the same rates. The same jobs will be available to them as adults. And so on. This is what Silvanus is getting at with correlation and causation.
What this means is that there is a huge problem with this sort of speculative paper, because they have extremely problematic assumptions built in that render them extraordinarily unsafe.