Children aged 1-9 in LONDON to be offered polio vaccine

[Dalint]

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/polio-vaccine-children-london-outbreak-b2142219.html?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=IND_Breaking_News%20polio&utm_term=IND_Breaking_Newsletter

Why only London?

I think you're taking it a bit personally, OP.

There is polio circulating, in pockets, in low numbers in London.

NHS are offering boosters to children under 9, to top up their immunity.

You get to choose. If you are unsure, ask your surgery. They'll tell you if a booster will help your child or if they are sufficiently covered already.

If they said 'boosters offered to people of x ethnic origin' or 'people who haven't been vaccinated before' then the coverage wouldn't be as effective and it would offend people and trigger xenophobia.

It's a booster. Which boosts immunity. It doesn't mean the previous vaccine didn't work, it just improves immunity more than your child already had. How is that so difficult to understand?

It's highly unlikely the current shitshow of a government had much to do with this. Public health specialists will have told them what needs doing, and they've agreed to it. Not everything is a conspiracy, sometimes stuff just happens and needs sorting.

And ffs, vaccination is not a punishment! What a bizarre analogy.

BBC news article on this answers most of the questions on the thread:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62492784.amp

@Dalint "Either it's effective as per the schedule, or it's not!"
It was effective, it prevented the spread of Polio in the uk.

Now in some areas, Polio is spreading among people who haven't been vaccinated. So that's a new situation which has been investigated and a response planned- offering boosters.

It's a real privilege to live in a country with such an evolved Public Health Service. We should appreciate and protect it!

I'm old enough to remember people of my parents generation who had suffered polio as children and had lifelong disabilities. I had an uncle who missed years of schooling and never caught up on his education.

I had the vaccine on a sugar cube in secondary school but it's over 40 years ago and I'd be happy to have a booster. This can be a serious disease.

If you don't want your child to have a booster that's fine OP. It's your choice. I don't understand why you're so angry.

If this prevents polio spreading then something proactive like this feels like a good thing to me.

This is the relevant sentence from @findingsomeone's article.

"The aim is two-fold. First to reduce the risk of any child catching the virus and being paralysed and also to raise immunity levels so the virus finds it harder to spread."

I’m not sure why the OP is getting such a hard time.

The BBC article states that even children who are fully vaccinated and up to date with their vaccines are being offered a booster. This includes all children between 1 and 9, so children who have only recently completed their full vaccine schedule.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62492784

The question the OP is therefore asking is IMO reasonable: are children aged 1 to 9 who, under normal circumstances, have had their first vaccinations but not yet had a booster, still at risk of polio then? And the answer I guess is yes.

OP, I’d say it was about risk. Usually, we have very very low risk of contracting polio. Therefore that v v low risk combined with the presumably also v v low risk of a vaccinated, un-boosted, child getting polio if exposed, means there is no need to boost children before 10. Now that the risk of getting polio has increased in London, it’s been decided it’s a sensible precaution. But the risk hasn’t increased elsewhere, so they are only doing London.

They know something that they are not telling us.

They know not enough people, especially in London are not vaccinated because of access to healthcare during covid / anti vaccine concerns / higher immigrant population in cities.

It's been detected.
It isn't causing a problem, but has the potential too so they are taking action to boost immunity.

That's a good thing.

That is really useful. Thank you.

They are responding (sensibly in my view) to a change in circumstance.

Live polio is now being found in multiple sewage treatment works in London. It's no longer a one-off rare event. They recognise an increased risk and this offer of a booster is their response.

Thank you so much for this post. I was starting to wonder whether I was speaking in an incomprehensible language!

Or it has mutated hence the need for a booster. Myself and my children are fully vaccinated, anyone who doesn't vaccinate their kids properly is an idiot in my eyes.

My problem is that I ask way too many questions.

We don't know that it has mutated, do we? Because us 'lay' people are not told everything.

What about the 11 year olds?
Why give it to a one year old who had their first shots?
Why give it to a four year old who has had their booster?

Because polio affects mainly young children seriously - not 11 year olds. Under 5's are most at risk however ever ending it til 9 gives a safety margin

I would understand 2-3 year olds and 5-13 year olds being given the booster.
1-9 year olds?

Most of those are vaccinated.

Why offer it?

If it came with the proviso of you will need this vaccine if your child never received or are in doubt as to whether your child ever received a polio vaccine, that I would understand.
I don't understand a universal roll-out to children aged 1-9 (vaccined or not)

10-13 year olds are in a lower risk group - as I've just explained

But most of them are vaccinated? Why vaccinate them again?

1-9 year olds are all vaccinated. Why another vaccine?

I would understand 2-3 year olds and 5-13 year olds being given the booster.

To be fair, 4 year olds will only be given it if it's more than a year from their pre school booster. So it basically is 1-3.5(ish) years old, and 4.5(ish) to 9 years old.

The are offering a booster not a new full vaccination programme. Why do you keep asking the same question that's been answered several times. There's no pressure to take it, just say no if you won't want to

My problem is that I ask way too many questions.

I think it's more that you won't listen to any answers.

Exactly- it's easier just to say 1-9 as some dc will have had it off schedule or not at all. You'll then be invited if you qualify or not if you don't (ie had booster last month)