Evidence shows that primary school children do not play a major role in spreading the virus, according to a member of the British Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage).
Professor Calum Semple said: “We’re quite confident now that primary school children are probably a quarter to half as likely to become infected and are also much less likely to pass the infection on.”
The professor of child health and outbreak medicine at the University of Liverpool told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme added: “So there’s growing evidence that primary school children are not amplifying this disease."
“Then, in secondary school children, again it’s less than adults, but it’s a gradient of effects such that sixth-formers are probably about the same risk as adults, but that data is slightly less stable.”
Asked whether secondary schools should remain open, he said it is a matter of balancing the harms of closure, such as damaging education.
He also suggested there is an argument for taking primary school-aged children out of testing altogether.
Asked about the rule of six, he said some countries have taken primary school-aged children out of the rule “and I certainly think it’s something that many scientists and public health doctors are considering”.
Prof Semple said he believes a “circuit breaker” is something that should be considered at a national level.
Circuit breaks are a short period of tightened restrictions for everyone to help control the spread of Covid-19.
Speaking in a personal capacity he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that “perhaps a circuit breaker a couple of weeks ago would have been really good idea”.
He added: “It’s always easier to reduce an outbreak at the earlier stage than to let it run and then try to reduce it at a later stage.
“So, yes, circuit breakers are certainly something we should be thinking about on a national basis.”
