5 ms·

Infection rates are the same. Symptoms are just mild in most cases. That's exactly and clearly what he meant, isn't it?

hownottowrite 7y ago
Absolutely not. He said they were immune which implies they cannot carry the infection. They absolutely can at the same rate as adults. This makes them vectors for further contagion just like everyone else.
- lm28469 7y ago
  > which implies they cannot carry the infection. You might want to update your internal definition of "immune".
  - hownottowrite 7y ago
    I think my internal definition is just fine thanks. Immunity implies that the host body has developed antibodies to neutralize viral replication or interferons which straight up kill viruses. As a result, the presence of the virus is reduced, possibly to near zero. But that's not really the case here. You might be asymptomatic but still shedding virus just as much as someone on their deathbed. With respect to children, they still become infected at the same rate. They still provide a place for viral replication even if they are asymptomatic.
- lliamander 7y ago
  Except that he then acknowledges children can still spread it to the elderly it the same tweet. Clearly he did not mean children could not pass on the infection.
  - jariel 7y ago
    I think it's clear what he meant to say, but he used a very poor choice of words. This is why we don't trust random thoughts by duderinos on Twitter and it's why we have people who specialize in communications.
    - lliamander 7y ago
      This is ridiculous. One merely need to read two sentences to understand exactly what Musk is saying. Trying to be pedantic about the meaning of immunity isn't helping. The error that Musk is making (and the one which BBC pointed out) was to downplay the fact that children can become seriously ill from this infection. The fact that severe disease is much less prevalent in younger patients does not mean it is entirely absent.
      - jariel 7y ago
        That's an intelligent reading of the Tweet. Most people, even if they are intelligent, are not acting with their full logical faculties. We are busy, distracted, not always thinking, give to much credit, tired, read it poorly, not bothering, and many of us aren't so bright. Which is why words matter. Communication is a skill. Musk is actually a talented communicator but in a special way, not the kind we want during a crisis where information is important. Saying 'children are immune' is irresponsible, he should apologize and update the Tweet. To not do so is to fall into Trumpish communicating, which is bad.
- cs02rm0 7y ago
  Cannot carry the infection? Ugh, I'll go with it. Still, there are other less literal interpretations. You can be immune from legal action, or immune from the effects of a global financial crash. When Musk says: ...but elderly with existing conditions are vulnerable. Family gatherings with close contact between kids & grandparents probably most risky. He clearly isn't saying kids cannot carry COVID-19. He's saying they're "essentially" immune from the symptoms.

Absolutely not. He said they were immune which implies they cannot carry the infection. They absolutely can at the same rate as adults. This makes them vectors for further contagion just like everyone else.

lm28469 7y ago
> which implies they cannot carry the infection. You might want to update your internal definition of "immune".
- hownottowrite 7y ago
  I think my internal definition is just fine thanks. Immunity implies that the host body has developed antibodies to neutralize viral replication or interferons which straight up kill viruses. As a result, the presence of the virus is reduced, possibly to near zero. But that's not really the case here. You might be asymptomatic but still shedding virus just as much as someone on their deathbed. With respect to children, they still become infected at the same rate. They still provide a place for viral replication even if they are asymptomatic.
lliamander 7y ago
Except that he then acknowledges children can still spread it to the elderly it the same tweet. Clearly he did not mean children could not pass on the infection.
- jariel 7y ago
  I think it's clear what he meant to say, but he used a very poor choice of words. This is why we don't trust random thoughts by duderinos on Twitter and it's why we have people who specialize in communications.
  - lliamander 7y ago
    This is ridiculous. One merely need to read two sentences to understand exactly what Musk is saying. Trying to be pedantic about the meaning of immunity isn't helping. The error that Musk is making (and the one which BBC pointed out) was to downplay the fact that children can become seriously ill from this infection. The fact that severe disease is much less prevalent in younger patients does not mean it is entirely absent.
    - jariel 7y ago
      That's an intelligent reading of the Tweet. Most people, even if they are intelligent, are not acting with their full logical faculties. We are busy, distracted, not always thinking, give to much credit, tired, read it poorly, not bothering, and many of us aren't so bright. Which is why words matter. Communication is a skill. Musk is actually a talented communicator but in a special way, not the kind we want during a crisis where information is important. Saying 'children are immune' is irresponsible, he should apologize and update the Tweet. To not do so is to fall into Trumpish communicating, which is bad.
cs02rm0 7y ago
Cannot carry the infection? Ugh, I'll go with it. Still, there are other less literal interpretations. You can be immune from legal action, or immune from the effects of a global financial crash. When Musk says: ...but elderly with existing conditions are vulnerable. Family gatherings with close contact between kids & grandparents probably most risky. He clearly isn't saying kids cannot carry COVID-19. He's saying they're "essentially" immune from the symptoms.