I did not read the article. I read the “study”. The “study” did not say that. The “study” said:
“COVID-19 appears to affect children less often, and with less severity, including frequent asymptomatic or subclinical infection. There is evi- dence of critical illness, but it is rare. The role of children in transmission is unclear, but it seems likely they do not play a significant role. Changes in laboratory or radiographic parameters are slightly different to adults, and changes usually mild. There is no direct evidence of vertical trans- mission, and early evidence suggests both infected mothers and infants are no more severely affected than other groups. Early evidence sug- gests no significant increased risk for children with immunosuppression, but further data is needed.”
“Appears”. “Unclear”. “No ‘direct’ evidence”. “Further data is needed”.
This wasn’t peer reviewed, it doesn’t reach any statistically significant conclusion, and it’s as relevant as the fake hydroxychloroquine “evidence”.