Who would offer their kids to be tested on?

[spongebob1000]

Just saw this article and I'm curious to find out what your opinion is. I wouldn't volunteer my 6 year old to be tested on.

www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-to-be-tested-on-children-as-young-as-six-b919672.html

I’m in awe you agreed to that trial. Amazing you did.

The Pandremix saga has shaken my trust in vaccines and it’s not often you see it discussed. I think when I hear “oh it’s perfectly safe” I need to check for myself. How the study was done, by whom, the numbers and the results.

The HPV vaccine troubles me too and I haven’t let my kids get it.

People always sneer “oh think you are cleverer than a scientist do you?” and I simply don’t understand that point at all. Much of it is applying common sense and it was clear Pandremix wasn’t properly tested. The jury still isn’t out on the Pfizer vaccine either and I know at least two people with longer lasting issues.

Personally I would choose covid over a vaccine that I didn’t fully know the data on yet. That may well change as I see the longer term data coming out.

@GlendaSugarbeanIsJudgingYou

Jesus Christ, Deary.

A little fucking tact, perhaps?

Agitators don’t tend to ‘do’ tact. MN is a cesspit lately.

I wouldn't.

CornettoninjaYou can call me names if you like. Agitator means to urge other to rebel. Maybe you didn’t have a grasp of the true meaning of the word. It’s pretty shit when you try and diminish posters bu calling them names because you have different views

The poster I replied to did take a rusk involving trial operation with her child’s child’s heart. It’s not something I would do but obviously others would. It doesn’t mean I’m causing people to rebel if I point that out. Obviously you don’t have a true grasp of the word..

@Calledyoulastnightfromglasgow

I’m in awe you agreed to that trial. Amazing you did.

The Pandremix saga has shaken my trust in vaccines and it’s not often you see it discussed. I think when I hear “oh it’s perfectly safe” I need to check for myself. How the study was done, by whom, the numbers and the results.

The HPV vaccine troubles me too and I haven’t let my kids get it.

People always sneer “oh think you are cleverer than a scientist do you?” and I simply don’t understand that point at all. Much of it is applying common sense and it was clear Pandremix wasn’t properly tested. The jury still isn’t out on the Pfizer vaccine either and I know at least two people with longer lasting issues.

Personally I would choose covid over a vaccine that I didn’t fully know the data on yet. That may well change as I see the longer term data coming out.

Vaccine side effects, if any, are usually within days.

Long term follow ups and long term data is for more in terms of efficacy (not safety) - so looking at how long immunity last etc.

I would for DD who is healthy but BAME. Not sure about DS who has well controlled epilepsy. But my friend's 16 year old has severe epilepsy and has been vaccinated. DS is very unlikely to get sick either from COVID or from the vaccination though I think it's better he isn't in the first round of trials. For DD there are more benefits than negatives.

The poster I replied to did take a risk involving trial operation with her child’s child’s heart.

No, I didn't. Both warm and cold solutions are used in operations, it varies from hospital to hospital. Both are safe and routinely used. Her hospital usually uses cold but if she'd had her surgery at another hospital she might have had warm. They were trying to establish which works better in children, because they don't know. It was safe.

You have made it perfectly clear that there was no additional risk, Oyster.

I think the word "trial" has caused the unpleasant and knee jerk response from that poster.

@Oysterbabe

The poster I replied to did take a risk involving trial operation with her child’s child’s heart.

No, I didn't. Both warm and cold solutions are used in operations, it varies from hospital to hospital. Both are safe and routinely used. Her hospital usually uses cold but if she'd had her surgery at another hospital she might have had warm. They were trying to establish which works better in children, because they don't know. It was safe.

If both were routinely used wouldn’t they already have the stats for it?

poochie that’s what they said about Pandremix and also the HPV vaccine. Adverse effects dismissed as too long after the vaccine

If the studies discount effects a few weeks after the vaccine then the study will report no adverse effects. But that doesn’t mean very much! With the HPV vaccine, the issues aren’t being reported by GPs.

@Itsjustricemichael

So three reasons:

1. To reduced the direct risk of long covid or PIMS to your child. Decide for yourself which risk is smaller. But this is a direct benefit.
2. To develop a child vaccine and reduce the pool of people the virus is circulating in. The more it circulates the higher the risk of variants. One of those variants could make ot a lot more deadly to children. Again.. this is a direct benefit against a potential future threat. You can decide if you think this is significant enough.
3. Only the third reason, which is the development of the vaccine for CEV kids is an absolutely altruistic one.. or as some phrase it , only for the greater good.

Is there any evidence that young children are currently getting long covid or that the vaccines could reduce their transmission levels? We know that they don’t tend to get ill with covid and that younger children don’t tend to transmit (due to lower virus levels?).

So there is something about children’s physiology which means that covid works differently than in adults. So what is the benefit to an individual child in having the vaccine - totally accept the greater good argument for CEV children where the risk of harm from the virus may be higher.

They wouldn’t have stats for it unless they were keeping that data and also trials are different. They control for a number of other things and then try and have one thing be different (as much as that is possible in cardiac surgery). It’s not the same as routine hospital data.

@DenisetheMenace

heAuthorityofJackieWeaver

@DenisetheMenace you’re absolutely right. I’m extremely grateful to any parent who gave their consent for their children to trial any of the vaccines we now give routinely (although consent was a different animal in decades past) and I’m very grateful to any parent willing to put their children forward now for a trial of the vaccine. But I think you’re completely mad to do so and would never ever do so myself and I don’t understand you for a second. But of course I will happily take advantage of the results should it prove to be safe, which I am sure it will, and send my children to be vaccinated then.”

Good, I’m very glad that you will. Vaccination is SO important,

Everyone has the absolute right to do what they think is right for their family. I have complete faith in science but totally appreciate that other people have a different opinion. There’s no need at all to be rude to each other about it.

This is the most sensible view of all. It’s a completely individual decision and berating others for their choice is ludicrous.

If both were routinely used wouldn’t they already have the stats for it?

No because they were looking for specific markers in the blood that weren't recorded. And all hospitals do things in a slightly different way so they couldn't be sure if it was the temperature of the fluid or something else. They needed data where everything else was constant.

Researchers don't want to harm children. They wouldn't be looking for volunteers for something that is unsafe. The covid trials are stage 3 trials, they know they are safe but want to test how effective they are.

Yes definitely!

Agree completely it's an individual choice and not to be rude to others for their choice in this case.

Yes, for a stage 3 trial.

I’m doing a stage 3 trial myself (Johnson & Johnson).

I would be happy to. Husband and I haven't discussed it much because ds is 5 and dd is 4 months.

@Dearymesheila thanks for the definition. Seen as you’re such a scholar perhaps you could provide me with a better descriptor for someone who is so hostile and aggressive to another’s personal anecdote on a contentious subject?

So far I have counted three threads on this very subject, all using the same language under the guise of faux curiosity and being openly hostile to those countering the OP opinion. If not completely obvious it’s certainly suspicious.

Vaccine maker Janssen said it is looking into testing on newborn babies. Why on earth would you offer your tiny baby up?

I wouldn’t, but I know dh would like to.

@Hammonds

It’s not even a comparison.

The swine flu jab had only been tested on 6000 people in clinics trials before being rolled up (ended up causing narcolepsy in 1 in 55,000 children). In contrast, coronavirus vaccines have now been given to over 100 million people worldwide.

My newborn son in intensive care was part of 3 clinical trials. I wasn’t ‘offering him up!’ I was aware that if he didn’t survive I would know that the research was going to a good purpose. And I was convinced about the safety of them. Trials are rarely life and death things- they are often about fine tuning bits of science.

People are currently talking a lot about assessing risk - especially when it comes to covid - but lose all sense of perspective with vaccines. Even with the swine flu vaccines, which had minimal clinical testing before being rolled out to children, 1 in 55,000 developed narcolepsy as a result. It’s seen as a terrible outcome, but in England, something like 1 in 6000 children are seriously hurt or killed in road traffic accidents every year.

So how are people assessing risk?

@ChaBishkoot

My newborn son in intensive care was part of 3 clinical trials. I wasn’t ‘offering him up!’ I was aware that if he didn’t survive I would know that the research was going to a good purpose. And I was convinced about the safety of them. Trials are rarely life and death things- they are often about fine tuning bits of science.

I hope your son is doing okay now.

It’s a bit different to be involved in a trial when the person is already sick to giving a vaccine as a trial to a newborn baby who is perfectly healthy.