Child COVID cases up 50% as Escambia epidemic continues

Escambia had its third consecutive third 200+ case day – 296 positives. Of those cases, 273 were Florida residents, six tied to nursing homes, one with corrections, median age of 38 and 13.6% positivity on 2,010 test results for July 16.

We are beginning to see the test results of July 4th weekend as more people lined up to get tested last week.

We’ve doubled the total positives the county had on June 29 – taking only 17 days.

Since Friday, July 10,  the number of children that have tested positive has risen by 50%. FDOH reported that 22  of the new cases for July 16 were between the ages of 5-14; 4 between 0-4 years.  Escambia schools open in 26 days – Aug. 12.

Ages 10-Jul 16-Jul  Increase
0-4 36 51 15 41.7%
5-14 97 151 54 55.7%
133 202 69 51.9%

All of Santa Rosa’s cases are Florida residents, five tied to nursing homes, four to corrections,  median age of 40 and 12.7% positivity on 659 tests.

Looks like Escambia and Santa Rosa will stay in the Red Zone.

For July 16, Chicago tested 4,357 people and had 232 positives; Seattle and King County tested 5,428 and had 239 positives.


as of July 16 7/15/20 7/16/20 Increase
Total Cases        315,775    327,241     11,466
Fla Residents        311,640    323,002     11,362
Non-Fla.            4,135        4,239          104
Deaths Per DOH        4,805 128
Escambia            5,054        5,346          292
Okaloosa            1,623        1,698            75
Santa Rosa            1,663        1,740            77

9 thoughts on “Child COVID cases up 50% as Escambia epidemic continues

  1. Dear Steve,

    Check my comment from earlier today, which links to an excellent epidemiological study that comes to the exact opposite conclusions, here.

    But maybe both of us should just be letting Lanza’s 9-year-old granddaughter resolve this debate, now that he had the bad taste to bring her into this adult-created problem.

    –Melissa Pino

  2. Melissa, no, I was not referring to that article.

    Following is a rather lengthy, well researched policy paper which utilized data from numerous European countries to include France, Germany, Netherlands and others.

    In the paper, they point out ‘that children are at very low risk of serious illness or death from COVID-19. Indeed, children aged 5–14 are seven times more likely to die of influenza than of COVID-19. Children aged 1–4 are 20 times more likely to die of influenza. Overall, Americans under the age of 25 represent 0.15 percent of all COVID-19 fatalities in the U.S.’

    They also state it ‘appears to be very low risk of transmission of COVID-19 from children to adults. As we detail below, population-wide studies in Europe have found little to no evidence of children-to-adult transmission; indeed, children have generally received the virus from adults.’

    They also point out the many negative consequences of students not attending school,which have an even greater impact on our lower-income population.

    The article supports re-opening schools utilizing the American Academy of Pediatrics guidlines.

  3. Dear Steve, are you talking about the piece in the journal _Pediatrics_ penned by Benjamin Lee and William V. Raszka?

    The one that Lanza kept leaning on yesterday while Commissioner Bergosh was demanding how it could possibly make sense that it was safe to open public schools when social distancing is not possible. That went well for Lanza (not that he seems to care).

    Here’s the article:

    Here’s the most important sentence from that article, explaining how they could possibly come to a conclusion that is such utter nonsense:

    “Another possibility is that because school closures occurred in most locations along with or before widespread physical distancing orders, most close contacts became limited to households, reducing opportunities for children to become infected in the community and present as index cases.”

    In other words, maybe the epidemiological data they used for their numbers crunching is completely worthless, because it doesn’t apply to all contexts. And how could it, since we can sum up their data sets in four words: “different time, different place.”

    Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

    I like the bit about how maybe kids don’t transmit it because they can’t cough as hard as adults. No doubt, particularly when their lungs could be compromised by covid, even when they seem asymptomatic.

    Then there is this gem of hairsplitting: “school closures alone may be insufficient to halt epidemic spread and have modest overall impacts compared with broader, community-wide physical distancing measures.”

    Keeping our kids, teachers, school bus drivers, and all other support staff safe may not be enough. So let’s just throw it open. Oh, and community-wide physical distancing is the real thing. Except we’re not doing that in Escambia. And there’s no way to do it properly in our public schools.

    If I had time, I’d be curious to follow the money on the two doctors who wrote this article. Believe it or not, once in a great while there is conflict of interest in peer-reviewed publications. A “jury of your peers” all comes down to which peers get selected for jury duty.

  4. The case for reopening schools is compelling. Data shows that for children, the risk of dying of #COVID19 is lower than that of dying of influenza in normal years. And there is a lot of European experience at this point that schools can be reopened without damaging public health.

  5. Twice during yesterday’s meeting, Commissioner May specifically asked Lanza about the percentage of childhood positives. Unbelievably, Lanza said we were at 4 percent positive for our kids. Commissioner May pressed him to ask if this was in line with the rate of childhood positives statewide. He said yes.

    Try 31% statewide. Therefore Escambia County children positives are OVER 20 PERCENT HIGHER THAN THE REST OF OUR STATE.

    There are just no words left to describe this intentional disinformation and negligence.

    The DOH and our local hospital administrators have got to start supporting our local officials and give them what they need: an honest assessment of the perilous risks our community is now facing.

  6. Most people to include city residents have no idea if they are “in” or “out” of the City of Pensacola. Perhaps we should paint a special stripe down the middle of our streets. Some people who live outside of the city but work in it do not understand what is meant by a sign that reads “Pensacola City Limit.” I wish I had a dollar for every person living outside of the city with a “Pensacola” mailing address who claimed to live in the city. Many of the people on both sides of the Confederate Monument issue do not live “in” the city. If the city had a vote to decide the issue, they could not vote. The city boundaries make no sense hindered by state law that makes annexation and deannexation a hellish process. As example, on Langley Avenue to the south of where I live in the city, the Circle K, The Butcher Shoppe and Walgreens, are not “in” the city. On Creighton Road to the north of my house in the city, the Gull Point Community Center is “in” the city but the Circle K just across the street is not. A far more effective approach would be for the Escambia County Commission, Pensacola City Council and Century Town Council to adopt a joint resolution encouraging voluntary mask wearing. That would do more good than the current fragmented, hyper-politicized approach. We have a two-county economy. If Santa Rosa County did the same, again a joint resolution calling for voluntary wearing of masks, that would go a lot to stop the spread. Nothing would stop Commissioner Lumon May from proposing such a resolution and calling for a meeting of the BCC with Pensacola and Century. As an emergency action, it could be done next week as a big virtual meeting. Pensacola could then repeal its stand-alone mask ordinance with criminal penalty.

Comments are closed.