RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 School education during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic - Which concept is safe, feasible and environmentally sound?
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.10.12.20211219
DO 10.1101/2020.10.12.20211219
A1 Christian J. Kähler
A1 Thomas Fuchs
A1 Benedikt Mutsch
A1 Rainer Hain
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/14/2020.10.12.20211219.abstract
AB The future belongs to children and they need education to shape the future with foresight and intention. Children therefore have the right to education, according to Article 29 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child [1]. However, professional education is not everything, because children must also experience their strengths and weaknesses together and educate each other to be responsible and considerate people, so that they become socially valuable personalities. Only in this way can they shape the future in a peaceful and humane way. Therefore, attending school is essential. However, children also have the right to protection and care by their parents and the state, because the welfare of the child must also be given priority in accordance with Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The question is therefore how schooling in community schools can be realized during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic without exposing children to an unnecessary risk of infection. It is not only about the children, because if the children are at risk, then so are their parents and grandparents and ultimately society as a whole. There are numerous concepts that promise safety in schools during the pandemic. When selecting concepts, the costs must of course be weighed against the benefits. People rightly expect an efficient use of resources. This means that either the set goal is achieved with the least possible resources or that the available resources are used to achieve the greatest possible approximation to the goal. In addition to the financial resources, however, the long-term consequences for the state, the economy, the population and the environment under the pressure of the pandemic must also be taken into account. Social cohesion and democracy must not be jeopardized either. Various protection concepts are currently under discussion. Often the advantages are overstated and the disadvantages concealed. Furthermore, some arguments are based on assumptions that are not true. The aim of this study is to provide a comparative assessment of the main protection concepts and to demonstrate, with the help of experimental analyses, the extent to which the protection concepts are effective. We will show that a comparatively high level of safety against infection in classrooms can be technically ensured without exposing children to masks. At the same time, the protection concept makes economic sense and the burden on the environment is comparatively low, so that infection prevention and climate protection do not have to be weighed against each other, because infection prevention and climate protection are political and social goals that have to be achieved together.Competing Interest StatementThe investigations were financially supported by the company TROTEC GmbH, Germany. The room air cleaner TAC V+ was provided by TROTEC GmbH for the investigations. C.J. Kähler received personal allowances as part of his payment as a professor.Funding StatementThe investigations were financially supported by the company TROTEC GmbH, Germany. The room air cleaner TAC V+ was provided by TROTEC GmbH for the investigations. C.J. Kähler received personal allowances as part of his payment as a professor.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:In the study, no experiments were carried out on humans or living creatures, so this point does not apply or is closed.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data is stored on an internal server and can be provided on request.