I'm not so sure that we can. In general, children seem to be far less contagious than adults:
Islandske test: Børn smitter langt mindre end voksne (Ingeniøren, April 7, 2020)
Teach a 5-year-old what a virus is
- Thread starter dann
- Start date
I'm not so sure that we can. In general, children seem to be far less contagious than adults:
Islandske test: Børn smitter langt mindre end voksne (Ingeniøren, April 7, 2020)
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
How about classic:
Once upon a time... life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj6G986lpag&list=PL8D1D0E1DB8598123&index=1
(For some reason I like Czech dub better than English)
Once upon a time... life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj6G986lpag&list=PL8D1D0E1DB8598123&index=1
(For some reason I like Czech dub better than English)
I blame myself for thinking that an attempt at reaching the particular childish mind that I was thinking of when I wrote the OP could be successful.
I am not sure that it would be expedient to try to teach ordinary five-year-olds about all the different elements that the immune system consists of, but in the case of the president, it would seem to be adamant to start any explanation with the difference between, on the one hand, exposing germs in a petri dish to ultraviolet light or pouring bleach into the dish and, on the other hand, fighting off infections in the human body.
Anything beyond that, and all the cartoons go far beyond that, would fail, I'm afraid.
Last edited:
A mom is recreating popular children's book covers to help explain the pandemic to kids (CNN, May 13, 2020)
I hope the creative mother will also come up with a do-over of the covers of such classics as:
Whose Boat Is This Boat?
and
A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo:
There is nothing wrong with the ones she already did, but I fear they wouldn't catch the attention of the toddlers in the White House.
I was impressed by the 5-year-olds in this short (1:42) video:
How do you explain coronavirus to young children? (BBC, April 17, 2020).
They don't seem to know much about viruses, but if they had been U.S. presidential advisers (and if the president had listened to their advice, of course), I'm pretty sure that the death toll in the USA would have been lower than it is at this point: 88,523.
I hope the creative mother will also come up with a do-over of the covers of such classics as:
Whose Boat Is This Boat?
and
A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo:
There is nothing wrong with the ones she already did, but I fear they wouldn't catch the attention of the toddlers in the White House.
I was impressed by the 5-year-olds in this short (1:42) video:
How do you explain coronavirus to young children? (BBC, April 17, 2020).
They don't seem to know much about viruses, but if they had been U.S. presidential advisers (and if the president had listened to their advice, of course), I'm pretty sure that the death toll in the USA would have been lower than it is at this point: 88,523.
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
Have them infected by both Ebola and the Plague.
I don't have much confidence in that technique. People were infected by both bacteria and viruses for at least 300,000 years without anybody noticing any real difference.
And nowadays, grownups still implore their doctors to prescribe antibiotics even when they have just been told that they have a virus.
We are not particularly good at distinguishing between two things that affect us in a similar way when we can't otherwise tell the difference. I guess that's why so many of us still take homeopathic drugs against diseases that the immunesystem copes with on its own.
I don't know if there are any very localized and relatively harmless viral and bacterial infections that you could children give and then let them treat on their own: warts and boils, maybe? Let that be a lesson to you!
And nowadays, grownups still implore their doctors to prescribe antibiotics even when they have just been told that they have a virus.
We are not particularly good at distinguishing between two things that affect us in a similar way when we can't otherwise tell the difference. I guess that's why so many of us still take homeopathic drugs against diseases that the immunesystem copes with on its own.
I don't know if there are any very localized and relatively harmless viral and bacterial infections that you could children give and then let them treat on their own: warts and boils, maybe? Let that be a lesson to you!
I stumbled on this short video (4 min.) from The Atlantic with kids talking about the pandemic. They are older, 9 to 11, than the children I considered when starting this thread, and they don't really try to explain viruses. They have obviously been informed by parents, teachers, the media and their peers about what the pandemic is, and their focus is on what to do to avoid infections, and they are concerned about their own health and that of their grandparents.
They don't come across as precocious in any way, and yet it strikes me how mature and sincere they are in comparison to a certain guy who talks far too much about this theme.
The Atlantic (April 14, 2020): Kids Explain the Coronavirus
They don't come across as precocious in any way, and yet it strikes me how mature and sincere they are in comparison to a certain guy who talks far too much about this theme.
The Atlantic (April 14, 2020): Kids Explain the Coronavirus
He still doesn't get it. He doesn't get it!
I think it is time to warm up this thread again since its theme has been made much more urgent by very recent events:
Trump falsely claims children almost immune (CNN, Aug. 5, 2020)
Fortunately, I stumbled on the following website last week, which offers four points of very good advice:
1. I find this part very important:
"Go through all their concerns and questions with them, rather than well-meaningly dismissing their feelings by telling them everything is fine. Try sharing with them that you also find events like this worrying.
(...)
You would want them to leave the conversation realising that, although bad things can happen, many people including world-leading experts are working very hard to reduce the impact of the pandemic, so they do not need to be scared all the time."
But I would probably leave out this bit: "Let them know that you can balance up these worries with the knowledge that they will likely not come true."
He already seems to be living in a dream world of his own, denying almost all parts of reality.
In the case in point, there also seems to be no reason whatsoever to worry about this happening:
"Children pick up more than we realise, and they may misinterpret or keep their feelings hidden from you."
2. The importance of this warning can't be emphasized enough:
"Small doses of real-life news from trustworthy sources are really helpful. Lots of exposure can do harm, because children can become fixated on a news story and repeatedly look at news coverage relating to it."
However, I feel ambiguous about this advice:
"Avoid turning the television off or closing web pages when they come in to the room. This can spark their interest in knowing what's really going on – and that is when their imagination can take over."
Sparking their interest would be an improvement in the case we're dealing with, wouldn't it? The imagination of the toddler has already taken over and needs to be put in its place with a big dose of reality.
3. There are too many lies about the pandemic out there, and a childish mind can easily be led astray, so it must be stressed that "the best way to communicate safety is by talking about worrying news with open, confident, clear and truthful facts. Talk to them about what they can do to look after themselves and others, explaining the importance of hand washing, for example. It’s also a good opportunity to talk about the benefits of kindness."
This is of particular importance when dealing with empathy-impaired children!
"Check in with them regularly to ask if they are discussing the pandemic with friends" - but warn him that discussing the pandemic with Fox & Friends is a no no!
4. In the case in point, responsibility should be stressed since he is so easily distracted:
"Talk to your children about what it means to be vulnerable (i.e. belonging to a high risk group as defined by the NHS) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and explain how many of the responses to it have been put in place to help protect those who are vulnerable.
You can use this as an opportunity for teaching children to grow into responsible citizens. Abiding by the measures – such as not going out and gathering with other people – means understanding that there is something bigger than individuals, and that we should protect each other."
Again: When dealing with the empathy-impaired, this is of utmost importance!
"Remind them that bullying is always wrong, and that we should each do our part to spread kindness and support each other."
I think it is time to warm up this thread again since its theme has been made much more urgent by very recent events:
Trump falsely claims children almost immune (CNN, Aug. 5, 2020)
Fortunately, I stumbled on the following website last week, which offers four points of very good advice:
1. I find this part very important:
"Go through all their concerns and questions with them, rather than well-meaningly dismissing their feelings by telling them everything is fine. Try sharing with them that you also find events like this worrying.
(...)
You would want them to leave the conversation realising that, although bad things can happen, many people including world-leading experts are working very hard to reduce the impact of the pandemic, so they do not need to be scared all the time."
But I would probably leave out this bit: "Let them know that you can balance up these worries with the knowledge that they will likely not come true."
He already seems to be living in a dream world of his own, denying almost all parts of reality.
In the case in point, there also seems to be no reason whatsoever to worry about this happening:
"Children pick up more than we realise, and they may misinterpret or keep their feelings hidden from you."
2. The importance of this warning can't be emphasized enough:
"Small doses of real-life news from trustworthy sources are really helpful. Lots of exposure can do harm, because children can become fixated on a news story and repeatedly look at news coverage relating to it."
However, I feel ambiguous about this advice:
"Avoid turning the television off or closing web pages when they come in to the room. This can spark their interest in knowing what's really going on – and that is when their imagination can take over."
Sparking their interest would be an improvement in the case we're dealing with, wouldn't it? The imagination of the toddler has already taken over and needs to be put in its place with a big dose of reality.
3. There are too many lies about the pandemic out there, and a childish mind can easily be led astray, so it must be stressed that "the best way to communicate safety is by talking about worrying news with open, confident, clear and truthful facts. Talk to them about what they can do to look after themselves and others, explaining the importance of hand washing, for example. It’s also a good opportunity to talk about the benefits of kindness."
This is of particular importance when dealing with empathy-impaired children!
"Check in with them regularly to ask if they are discussing the pandemic with friends" - but warn him that discussing the pandemic with Fox & Friends is a no no!
4. In the case in point, responsibility should be stressed since he is so easily distracted:
"Talk to your children about what it means to be vulnerable (i.e. belonging to a high risk group as defined by the NHS) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and explain how many of the responses to it have been put in place to help protect those who are vulnerable.
You can use this as an opportunity for teaching children to grow into responsible citizens. Abiding by the measures – such as not going out and gathering with other people – means understanding that there is something bigger than individuals, and that we should protect each other."
Again: When dealing with the empathy-impaired, this is of utmost importance!
"Remind them that bullying is always wrong, and that we should each do our part to spread kindness and support each other."
Last edited:
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Honestly, if someone can explain it to me, as an adult, in a way that makes a material difference, I'd appreciate it. So far I've got:
- Bacteria are tiny little animals that get in your body and reproduce... and make you sick
- Viruses are tiny little machines that get in your cells and make copies of themselves... and make you sick
- Fungi are tiny little plants that get in your body and try to grow there... and make you sick
- Your body produces antibodies that can attack some bacteria and some viruses, but aren't very good at attacking other bacteria or viruses, and I don't know if they're any good at attacking fungi or not.
- Antibiotics work on bacteria but not on viruses or fungi; some antibiotics work on a lot of bacteria, but some bacteria need special kinds of antibiotics, and some bacteria are really tough and hard to kill even with strong antibiotics
- Antivirals work on viruses (but not fungi or bacteria) but are kind of specific, and some viruses we don't have antivirals for at all
- Antifugals are a mystery to me, I don't know if they're specific or general
All of them are little bitty things that make you sick and some of them our bodies are good at fighting off and some of them we aren't and some of them have medicine that helps and others don't and basically tiny little invisible things can be a lot of trouble. They just go about it a bit differently. Some are weeds that make a lot of other weeds and clog up your body's systems. Some are animals that breed like rats and clog up your body's systems. Some are machines that are like psychotic photocopiers that clog up your body's systems.
- Bacteria are tiny little animals that get in your body and reproduce... and make you sick
- Viruses are tiny little machines that get in your cells and make copies of themselves... and make you sick
- Fungi are tiny little plants that get in your body and try to grow there... and make you sick
- Your body produces antibodies that can attack some bacteria and some viruses, but aren't very good at attacking other bacteria or viruses, and I don't know if they're any good at attacking fungi or not.
- Antibiotics work on bacteria but not on viruses or fungi; some antibiotics work on a lot of bacteria, but some bacteria need special kinds of antibiotics, and some bacteria are really tough and hard to kill even with strong antibiotics
- Antivirals work on viruses (but not fungi or bacteria) but are kind of specific, and some viruses we don't have antivirals for at all
- Antifugals are a mystery to me, I don't know if they're specific or general
All of them are little bitty things that make you sick and some of them our bodies are good at fighting off and some of them we aren't and some of them have medicine that helps and others don't and basically tiny little invisible things can be a lot of trouble. They just go about it a bit differently. Some are weeds that make a lot of other weeds and clog up your body's systems. Some are animals that breed like rats and clog up your body's systems. Some are machines that are like psychotic photocopiers that clog up your body's systems.
Last edited:
You are waaaay beyond the presidential level already, and I think I'll leave it to the professionals, Rolfe, for instance, to comment on most of your ideas, but there are a few that are wrong:
1. A fungus is not a plant. It is easy to think of (some of) them as such because we see them grow in the woods or on our lawns much like plants do, apparently, but they are actually very different. For instance, they don't grow by using sunlight to produce sugars: They have no chlorophyll.
2. You know that a virus is not really alive. It has no metabolism. But like life, it reproduces and evolves - hence the mutations of viruses that we hear about all the time.
But there are better analogies than "little machines". The best one is probably that of a "computer virus", which, of course, is already an analogy of actual viruses.
So you could describe viruses as little pieces of software (RNA) that program the hardware of the cells to produce copies of the virus. RNA, i.e. what the virus actually smuggles into the cells, is already referred to with the analogy code. Virus: Replication cycle (Wikipedia)
3. There is more to the immune system than just antibodies. This is important in the discussion of SARS-CoV-2 because the infection may still have produced immunity even if a test shows that you have no antibodies. But I think that the researchers still don't know if that's the case with the coronavirus.
cf. the video proposed by Beelzebuddy in post 15.
1. A fungus is not a plant. It is easy to think of (some of) them as such because we see them grow in the woods or on our lawns much like plants do, apparently, but they are actually very different. For instance, they don't grow by using sunlight to produce sugars: They have no chlorophyll.
2. You know that a virus is not really alive. It has no metabolism. But like life, it reproduces and evolves - hence the mutations of viruses that we hear about all the time.
But there are better analogies than "little machines". The best one is probably that of a "computer virus", which, of course, is already an analogy of actual viruses.
So you could describe viruses as little pieces of software (RNA) that program the hardware of the cells to produce copies of the virus. RNA, i.e. what the virus actually smuggles into the cells, is already referred to with the analogy code. Virus: Replication cycle (Wikipedia)
3. There is more to the immune system than just antibodies. This is important in the discussion of SARS-CoV-2 because the infection may still have produced immunity even if a test shows that you have no antibodies. But I think that the researchers still don't know if that's the case with the coronavirus.
cf. the video proposed by Beelzebuddy in post 15.
Last edited:
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
I know a fungus isn't a plant. But the distinction is relatively technical and in layman's parlance, mushrooms count as a vegetable serving.
I know viruses aren't alive. I use "little machines" rather than computer viruses to avoid the tautology. I tend to think of them more like hypothetical nanobots that use cells to replicate themselves.
I also know the immune system is more complicated than just antibodies. But just explaining antibodies is enough of a challenge for a 5-year old, and I lack sufficient knowledge of anything other than basic antibodies so I simply don't address it.
I know viruses aren't alive. I use "little machines" rather than computer viruses to avoid the tautology. I tend to think of them more like hypothetical nanobots that use cells to replicate themselves.
I also know the immune system is more complicated than just antibodies. But just explaining antibodies is enough of a challenge for a 5-year old, and I lack sufficient knowledge of anything other than basic antibodies so I simply don't address it.
Beelzebuddy
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,606
Imagine one of your cells as a house. Bacteria smash a window with a brick and grab as much stuff as they can before the cops show up. Viruses knock politely, then stick their foot in the door, barge in, eat your food and order crap from Amazon until you're broke.
Antibiotics are drugs designed to **** up anyone holding a brick. This can be a problem because part of your immune system is a line of guys with bricks smashing food until it's small enough to digest. Overuse of antibiotics can also result in more guys who use bats instead.
Antivirals similarly target viruses, but it's harder to catch them since they hide in cells trying on your clothes and watching pay-per-view. You need enough stuff in the system to catch them en route to the next cell often enough to make a difference. So the treatments are usually less effective, to the point where you might as well wait for your immune system to build up naturally and put a cop on every corner, if it doesn't kill you in the process.
I don't understand what exactly the Amazon analogy corresponds to.
I like this one, in particular the question from a girl about Santa Claus and the one from a boy who has been washing his hands for a very long time and now wonders why the virus still hasn't gone away!
Dr. Sanjay Gupta answers kids' coronavirus questions (CNN, Aug. 8, 2020)
But I don't think I would use terms like preexisting conditions or talk about percentages when answering a question from a six-year-old.
I like this one, in particular the question from a girl about Santa Claus and the one from a boy who has been washing his hands for a very long time and now wonders why the virus still hasn't gone away!
Dr. Sanjay Gupta answers kids' coronavirus questions (CNN, Aug. 8, 2020)
But I don't think I would use terms like preexisting conditions or talk about percentages when answering a question from a six-year-old.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
I love this analogy! I'm giggling out loud at my home-desk, and almost choked on my mouthful of tea!
Stegosaurus already suggested something similar:
It remains to be seen how much Trump actually learned, but even if it turns out to have been effective, it is not a method I would recommend for 5-year-olds: Trump "Learned A Lot" About COVID-19 By Going To "Real School" (NDTV, Oct. 5, 2020)
It remains to be seen how much Trump actually learned, but even if it turns out to have been effective, it is not a method I would recommend for 5-year-olds: Trump "Learned A Lot" About COVID-19 By Going To "Real School" (NDTV, Oct. 5, 2020)
Last edited:
Naval Diplomat
Student
I heard he never made it to "real school". Bone spurs and what not.
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2011
- Messages
- 12,766
The Ebola virus is too good for Trump.
To make this not-political: At the level of a 5-year-old I don't think you need to differentiate between viruses and bacteria. The first time someone told me that invisible (because tiny) creatures could make me sick it made a reasonable amount of sense. After that, hand-washing and mask-wearing aren't much of a reach.
I have been struck by the number of very small children I see wearing masks without fussing about it. They tolerate it because why not? It's just another form of clothing, one they accept because it's the new normal, which to them is just normal.
For most grown ups, the differentiation also doesn't do much to help them cope with infections except when they don't understand why antibiotics against the flu or Covid-19 when it worked wonders the last time they had strep.
Children do many things without and many things with fussing about it. Now that there's a pandemic, they might as well learn that there are many different kinds of infections, that they infect in difference ways, and should be treated in different ways. In other words, it will make them understand the purpose of the face mask it they learn that the coronavirus is a respiratory airborne viral infection - unlike typhus, cholera or HIV where face masks are useless.
I don't think it is difficult to explain the importance of two basic distinctions, for now:
How they are transmitted: airborne or not airborne? (i.e. why face masks are useful against coronavirus)
How they are treated: virus or bacteria? (i.e. why the eye drops that cured your pink eye won't cure Covid-19)
MDs will be so pleased if the next generations stop begging them to prescribe antibiotics for viral infections.
You don't need to be a great super genius or to have natural ability to understand this, and it will boost the self-confidence of 5-year-olds to know that they are smarter than the president.
Children do many things without and many things with fussing about it. Now that there's a pandemic, they might as well learn that there are many different kinds of infections, that they infect in difference ways, and should be treated in different ways. In other words, it will make them understand the purpose of the face mask it they learn that the coronavirus is a respiratory airborne viral infection - unlike typhus, cholera or HIV where face masks are useless.
I don't think it is difficult to explain the importance of two basic distinctions, for now:
How they are transmitted: airborne or not airborne? (i.e. why face masks are useful against coronavirus)
How they are treated: virus or bacteria? (i.e. why the eye drops that cured your pink eye won't cure Covid-19)
MDs will be so pleased if the next generations stop begging them to prescribe antibiotics for viral infections.
You don't need to be a great super genius or to have natural ability to understand this, and it will boost the self-confidence of 5-year-olds to know that they are smarter than the president.
Last edited: