School pupils vaccinated from September

[Totalbeach]

This is in lots of papers today. Such as:

www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19274021.secondary-school-pupils-set-get-covid-jab-september/

And:

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/02/nhs-england-draws-up-plan-to-give-covid-jabs-to-children-12-and-over

What’s your reaction?

Mine is that I 100% won’t be allowing my children to be vaccinated.

In the whole pandemic so far, 12 children under 15 have died in the U.K. That increases to 32 in the under 20s. The mortality rate is vanishingly tiny. A huge percentage of kids don’t even get symptoms at all.

The government has assured us till they are blue in the face that schools are safe and that children don’t spread it so it will be interesting to see what kind of enormous gaslighting they attempt to pull off to persuade parents they now need to vaccinate their kids.

The long term effects of the vaccines are totally unknown and recent events with AZ have proved rather horribly that even after a vaccine is rolled out, serious effects can come to light. Including events that disproportionately affect certain age groups.

I’m fully vaccinated (including first Covid vaccine) as are my kids but there is no way I’d let them be vaccinated in September. With any of the vaccines.

@Roonerspismed

Why am I not worried? Because the data in covid shows that it’s a low risk to young and healthy people. There are things you can do to optimise that - I can therefore control some of the covid risk.

I can’t control the risk from the vaccines - I either get one or I don’t. (I can’t even decide which one I get). The data for the vaccines is ever evolving and I was shocked the the MHRA missed the initial clot issues. Dumbfounded shocked. Absolutely astonished. And then data about the risks was delayed until after the bank holiday weekend. Therefore I have lost faith in our regulator.

I know a number of people who have had covid and all have recovered well. I know several who are struggling weeks after their vaccines, one who has died and one seriously ill. All elderly by the way and in each and every case these effects have been dismissed as coincidental. This upsets me hugely

So yes - covid I will take. The vaccine - I’m watching. And it won’t be going anywhere near my kids.

But the data shows that the vaccine is lower risk than Covid for young and healthy people.

Like the data for the vaccines, the data for Covid is also ever-evolving.

And your anecdotes are not data at all.

The data really doesn’t show the risk currently of covid to young people is greater than the AZ vaccine. It shows the reverse!

The government updates put a nice spin here

Exactly. It's a very sobering thought but if they rolled out AstraZeneca to children, if it killed them at the rate it's killing 30 - 40 year olds, more would die from vaccination than from the entire pandemic in the UK so far. And since AZ seems to kill more people the younger the age groups they go to, it may well be an even higher mortality rate.

Pfizer - not so far, but they've only tested it on a few thousand kids. AZ would pass the test of a few thousand and still be dangerous and morally reprehensible to give to kids. Let's hope Pfizer isn't the same. There have been reports of possible links between this jab and myocarditis (heart inflammation), almost entirely in young men in Israel. Could be nothing, or it could be something. And it might be a different something that they only find out about after they've vaccinated a lot of children.

@Roonerspismed

The data really doesn’t show the risk currently of covid to young people is greater than the AZ vaccine. It shows the reverse!

The government updates put a nice spin here

I was under the impression it’s the Pfizer vaccine that is being approved.

Can you show me the data showing that the vaccine is more dangerous to young people than Covid please?

There have been reports of possible links between this jab and myocarditis (heart inflammation), almost entirely in young men in Israel. Could be nothing, or it could be something. And it might be a different something that they only find out about after they've vaccinated a lot of children.

At a higher rate than Covid has been causing myocarditis in young people?

zz it’s on the MHRA website - for all to see. But it relates to the AZ vaccine to be fair and when covid cases are low

You are correct about Pfizer being the vaccine used for very young people. We don’t have long term safety data and the covid threat to very young people is tiny. I cannot fathom why any parent would use a vaccine with such small data on young props on their child unless their child was vulnerable

Totally agree Rooner

I don’t know any parent who is currently going to agree to child vaccination in same way my kids aren’t vaccinated for flu

They’ve more chance of catching flu and actually I reckon they’d be more ill with flu than covid

The uptake simply won’t be there as the risk isn’t there at the moment

However many may feel forced if they go down the whole vaccine passport route - I’m mid 40s and to be fair that’s the only reason I got mine as we are planning summer holiday in July

ZZ nobody can show you data that proves the vaccine is more dangerous to young people than Covid, because there is not enough data. And there lies the problem.

Hesitant parents don't want their children to BE that data. And at this stage are comfortable with what we know about kids who catch Covid vs what we know about how kids may or may not react to a vaccine.

@JaniieJones

'think the morals is vaccinating one sector of the population to protect another is highly questionable'

Oh well that's funny because I was under the impression this last year has had a massive impact on young people, lost education etc and all the psychological damage. So they may be less at risk of serious disease but they suffer as much as the rest of us when lockdowns are needed due to exponential spread. Obviously.

It wasn’t coronavirus that caused it but the panicked response to it. Plenty of places handled the virus without lockdowns or remote schooling.

@TattyDevine

ZZ nobody can show you data that proves the vaccine is more dangerous to young people than Covid, because there is not enough data. And there lies the problem.

Hesitant parents don't want their children to BE that data. And at this stage are comfortable with what we know about kids who catch Covid vs what we know about how kids may or may not react to a vaccine.

So you're comfortable with kids suffering long Covid, about which we have plenty of data, rather than them receiving an extensively tested vaccine that has shown no long-term effects in the millions who have received it during both testing and administration.

OK...

So just to clarify - people who keep saying that the risks of Covid to young people are comfortable with kids suffering long Covid, about which we have plenty of data, rather than them receiving an extensively tested vaccine that has shown no long-term effects in the millions who have received it during both testing and administration.

Just a few of the articles and research about long Covid in young people...

www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/long-covid-and-children-the-unseen-casualties-of-covid-19#How-many-children-are-long-haulers?

www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(21)00123-5/fulltext

www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4470

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/

news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/04/harvard-medical-school-expert-explains-long-covid/

www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-long-term-effects/art-20490351

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/05/210506125817.htm

healthblog.uofmhealth.org/childrens-health/long-haul-covid-kids

khn.org/news/article/children-covid-long-hauler-clinics-pediatric-hospitals/

Sheesh MN really is not working properly - I've reported my duplicate posts.

So you're comfortable with kids suffering long Covid, about which we have plenty of data, rather than them receiving an extensively tested vaccine that has shown no long-term effects in the millions who have received it during both testing and administration

I don’t think we have a lot of good data for it, and I think it’s far too often used to delay school reopenings or — in this case — to force the issue of vaccinating children for a disease that doesn’t affect them all that much.

Here’s a good article on why we should be cautious about this:
www.statnews.com/2021/03/22/we-need-to-start-thinking-more-critically-speaking-cautiously-long-covid/

No way should people be vaccinating children.
On a population level, yes, it's for the best to vaccinate all children. But on an individual level, as a parent with a child with no immunocompromise or other risk factor, it's madness to even consider it.

We will do it. It’s not just about protecting the vaccine refusers, if it was I wouldn’t be bothered. But for everyone who won’t vaccinate there is a potential way in for a mutation. So the more of us immune the better.

I don’t want my children’s lives impacted by yet another lockdown. They’ve been through enough.

@Thatswatshesaid

We will do it. It’s not just about protecting the vaccine refusers, if it was I wouldn’t be bothered. But for everyone who won’t vaccinate there is a potential way in for a mutation. So the more of us immune the better.

No way you are going to vaccinate the entire globe, and no one is going to tolerate hard borders for years on end either.

So mutations are going to spread whether or not you offer your child up for this. We should focus on vulnerable populations GLOBALLY rather than ‘protect’ children who really don’t need it. We know who is vulnerable and who is not.

@Thatswatshesaid

I don’t want my children’s lives impacted by yet another lockdown. They’ve been through enough.

So don’t lockdown. Works for many other places. We should protect the vulnerable, not lock up the young and healthy.

I don’t think we have a lot of good data for it, and I think it’s far too often used to delay school reopenings or — in this case — to force the issue of vaccinating children for a disease that doesn’t affect them all that much.

Yet it clearly does affect them, as the articles that I posted from sources like The Lancet, Mayo Clinic, NCBI, BMJ, Harvard etc show.

ACIP report on Pfizer vaccine

yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/acip-meeting-for-the-pfizer-adolescent

Today the ACIP met to discuss the safety and effectiveness of the adolescent Pfizer vaccine. This is the final step in approving the vaccine for mass distribution. Here are the slides. And here are your cliff notes…

Bottom Line: Things are looking good. Well, not just good, they are looking great. This trial was as clean as it can get. There is nothing (big) we didn't expect. This vaccine is incredibly safe. And works incredibly well. I strongly support the use of this vaccine among those aged 12+. And this is urgent. If I had an adolescent, I would get them the vaccine as soon as possible.

Study Overview

This was considered a Phase 2/3 clinical trial. This means the study was designed to assess immunogenicity (how well the vaccine works at developing antibodies, which is Phase 2) and efficacy (how well the vaccine prevents COVID19, which is Phase 3).

Two age groups were in this study:

12-15 year old cohort: 1,131 in vaccine group and 1,129 in placebo group
16-25 year old cohort: 1,867 in vaccine group and 1,903 in placebo group
Doses were given 3 weeks apart, same dosage as the adults, and saline placebo
Every participant had at least 1 month of follow-up data. 4.3% of subjects had more than 3 months of follow-up time for this data

Safety

Mostly mild-to-moderate side effects were reported. Overall, adolescents showed a similar side effect pattern to adults:

Vaccine group reported higher rates of fever, fatigue, headaches, chills, diarrhea, muscle pain, and joint pain than the placebo group
Worse side effects with the second dose compared to the first

Adverse events: 6.0% in vaccine group and 5.9% in the placebo group

There was a small numerical imbalance of mental illness among the vaccine group (5 cases) compared to the placebo group (0 cases). The FDA and CDC looked into this very carefully to ensure SSRI’s don’t worsen depression or suicide ideation among vaccinated adolescents. (This is probably why it took so long for EUA approval). After intensive review, there was no casual link between psychological events and the vaccine
An unsolicited (i.e. not expected) adverse event that came up more in the vaccine group was swollen lymph nodes (lymphadenopathy). 9 in the vaccine group vs. 2 in the placebo group. This could be related to the vaccine. All cases resolved within 1 week of starting.
Serious adverse events: 5 in the vaccine group (0.4%) and 2 in the placebo group (0.2%). None of these adverse events were connected to the vaccine.
1 pregnancy after vaccination in the 16-25 year old cohort. 0 pregnancies in the 12-15 year old cohort.
No cases of Bells Palsy, anaphylaxis, blood clots, MIS-C, or deaths were reported by any trial participants (vaccine or placebo)

Immunogenicity

One main purpose of this trial was to see if vaccines worked (i.e. create neutralizing antibodies) as well in adolescents as in young adults. In order to do this, participants were randomly selected to give blood.

The immune response was actually better among adolescents (12-15 years) than compared to young adults (16-25 years old). Which is fantastic.

Efficacy

In the vaccine group, there were 3 COVID19 cases after the 1st dose
After the 2nd dose, there was 100% efficacy (there were 16 cases of COVID among the placebo and 0 among the vaccinated)

There were no severe cases of COVID19 during this study

YES, COVID-19 disease among adolescents is a public health problem

1.5 million cases of COVID among adolescents throughout the pandemic. After adjusting for underreporting, 22.2 million children (5-17 years of age) has had COVID19. This attributes to 19% of the cases in the general population.

Adolescents have the highest rate of infection and symptomatic infection (compared to adults and children), but hospitalizations are lower than adults

127 COVID19 adolescent deaths since the beginning of the pandemic. Although this seems low, death among adolescents is low overall. This ranks COVID19 as a top 10 cause of death in the United States for adolescents.

3,742 MIS-C cases since the pandemic

21% were among adolescents

Severity of MIS-C (like heart function and ICU admission) is worse for adolescents compared to younger children

Transmission is higher in high school settings than elementary school settings

Living with a child engaged in-person school increases the odds of COVID19 for the household compared to children not in attendance of in-person school. In other words, vaccinations are incredibly important with the opening of schools.

Vaccine hesitancy among adolescents and parents

The good news is that 50% of adolescents/parents want to get the vaccine. The bad news is that 50% of adolescents/parents want to get the vaccine. We need this to increase.

Co-administration

There was a LOT of discussion around how COVID19 vaccines should be administered with other childhood vaccines. Up until now, it’s recommended that people wait 14 days after COVID19 vaccine for other vaccines. This CDC recommendation was originally made out an abundance of caution; it was not evidence-based.

Some members strongly voiced that we need data in order to remove this requirement. Vaccines could interact with each other, particularly around vaccine effectiveness and side effects. We need to follow this closely.

Other members reminded us that, unfortunately though, this information was not systematically collected or tested in clinical trials so it would take a while to assess. And, we are in the middle of an unprecedented pandemic. And, it’s hard to get adolescents back into a visit multiple times and we don’t want adolescents to get behind on their vaccine schedule.

Vote

The external committee then was asked to discuss and vote: “The Pfizer vaccine is recommended for persons 12-15 years of age in the U.S. under the FDA Emergency Use Authorization.”

Yes- 14 votes
No- 0 votes
Recusal-1 vote
Motion passes. Adolescents can now go get their vaccine. Cheers!

Professor Anthony Harnden, the deputy chairman of the JCVI, who obviously advise ministers who should get the vaccine following MHRA approval (which it doesn't have yet), said the JCVI will be closely watching the US rollout for safety signals.

"The overwhelming majority of children and young people don't seem to suffer severe effects from Covid. Although there is a minority that get very sick, the vast, vast majority don't".

He acknowledged a risk from long Covid and the educational harm of going off sick but said that "they are the only direct benefits from vaccinating children, and therefore most the benefits of vaccinating children would be for the protection of the wider community, those unvaccinated adults or those adults for whatever reason who haven't responded as well. You would be vaccinating a group of children essentially to prevent illness in the community, so you'd have to be absolutely sure of the safety of these vaccines in children. There are a lot of ethical considerations".

He went on to say children are "not little adults" and that "you've still got safety considerations to look at quite carefully because they can respond differently to different pharmaceutical drug interventions. We can't be absolutely clear that just because it's safe in adults it will be safe in children. We need to find that out from data".

So the JCVI are going to closely watch the use of Pfizer in US teenagers before recommending it for use in the UK.

Which sounds pretty sensible to me.

So the JCVI are going to closely watch the use of Pfizer in US teenagers before recommending it for use in the UK.

Which sounds pretty sensible to me.

Sensible - or unethical on a global scale?

Because let's face it, what they're really saying is, 'Let's see if any of those kids die or get injured so we can decide whether to risk doing it to our kids'.

And even if not one single child in the US comes to any harm from their vaccine between now and September, it won't prove the long-term safety. It won't prove that girls will get their periods when they should have and develop and be fertile as they should or that no longer-term damage has been done to any of their young, growing bodies. We'll only know that in a few years.

@Ninefeettall how else do you suggest they do it ? All vaccines would of had to be tested on people and long term data waited on
We don't make vaccinations compulsory here and they may not even be needed bit whats your alternative

The UK has consistently made poor decisions about Covid, so I wouldn't be surprised if they continue to do so.

Meanwhile in the US, with vaccination well underway, our universities are reopening fully in-person from August onwards, and our schools are expecting to be back to normal in September.

I'm happy to continue following public health guidance here.