Teens will not be routinely vaccinated, JCVI recommends

[noblegiraffe]

Their report isn't out till tomorrow, but continuing with the govt tradition of making big announcements via favoured news outlets, the Telegraph reports that the guidance will be that children aged 12+ will not be offered routine covid vaccinations.

"Instead, under guidance due to be issued on Monday, jabs will be offered to children between 12 and 15 who are deemed vulnerable to Covid or who live with adults who are immunosuppressed or otherwise vulnerable to the virus. They will also now be offered to all 17-year-olds within three months of their 18th birthday."

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/07/17/children-will-get-covid-vaccines-vulnerable/

So from September, there will be literally nothing stopping covid spreading around schools bar the odd open window.

Let’s face it we are vaccinating a lot of adults who most likely be perfectly fine if they caught the virus.

Why does the same not apply to children?

I agree! And I don't like how long covid looks in the children I know who have it, too. That is something I'd like to avoid for my children.

I genuinely don’t have a problem with this. I’m very pro vax and DS5 has had all his childhood vaccinations, but he wouldn’t be having this one. It’s still under medical trial until 2023 and he has no underlying conditions.

I think the real thing everyone should be angry about is the fact that the U.K. handling of this pandemic has been so bad that the only way out is a vaccination. That, again, despite everything that should have been learnt last year, schools are set to open with no mitigation, leaving children, teachers and their communities at risk.

It isn’t lack of vaccination that is the problem here, it’s a continued and sustained lack of investment and acknowledgment from our government. This was the perfect time to invest in our education system - big recruitment drive to make smaller classes, massive overhaul of school buildings to improve ventilation etc.

But no.

surely there is a reason the JCVI have decided against it?

It will be interesting to read the report tomorrow.

The Telegraph article says the decision will be kept under review.

[quote CantGetNoSleep73]@Appuskidu the bloody vaccine is more dangerous than covid to kids ffs I am sick of seeing all the jab kids posts. You want yours jabbed fine, do it - but not everyone wants them jabbed [/quote]
They aren't going to be compulsory. Why should you be given the right not to have the jab but I can't have the right to jab my kids?

@Ifitquacks

But don’t you think the JCVI may be better placed to make the decision than us? We’re supposed to be following the science, after all. I personally have no problem with the vaccination being offered to over 12’s, but surely there is a reason the JCVI have decided against it?

Makes you wonder what is worrying them that isn’t worrying other countries?!

That's really disappointing & once again out of sync with other countries.

This is really good news. Very sensible.

spring i don't know, personally I think the choice should be there for all 12+ to be jabbed. But this is a step in the right direction and is a good thing - just wondering why its not being seen that way.

Schools are a shit storm already. I guess they're hoping most of the kids will have acquired natural immunity of some sort. Criminal IMO.

I can’t read the article. Would someone who can mind letting me know if it gives and indication about when this might start? Many thanks,

Makes you wonder what is worrying them that isn’t worrying other countries?!

Decision making often differs between countries. For example Spain have never had any form of quarantine for international arrivals.

I think this is the right decision. We can't routinely vaccinate children for an illness where the vaccine has greater risk than the illness.

DS is 17 and DH is Type 2 diabetic. If I understand this right, DS won't be offered a vaccine. If so, I find it ridiculous. DS is on the Tube everyday and socialising more than we are.

Those who don't want to jab their kids surely have the choice not to, but teens should have the choice to get it.

I wonder if disruption to education from catching covid has been factored in as a 'risk'.

@Farevalah

I’m glad they’ve reached this decision. DS is 13 and I wouldn't have let him have the vaccine anyway - I don’t think enough is known about the long term side effects so risk possibly outweighs the benefit in vaxxing teens. (Not anti vaccine btw, DH and I are fully jabbed.)

You see, I just don't get this. I understand and respect your decision. I don't know if I'd make the same one in your shoes, because I'm not.

But opening up vaccination to 12+ would make precisely zero difference to your son. He's not getting it.

It would make a difference to those kids where they or their parents have decided they do want it.

So why are you glad that they have less choice than you do?

I'm pretty sure (hopeful) there will be a u turn on this decision soon enough.

In the meantime it's good news for 12+ vulnerable but I feel for the families of under 12s CEV children who face the prospects of no protection in schools and elsewhere.

@AlohaMolly

I genuinely don’t have a problem with this. I’m very pro vax and DS5 has had all his childhood vaccinations, but he wouldn’t be having this one. It’s still under medical trial until 2023 and he has no underlying conditions.

I think the real thing everyone should be angry about is the fact that the U.K. handling of this pandemic has been so bad that the only way out is a vaccination. That, again, despite everything that should have been learnt last year, schools are set to open with no mitigation, leaving children, teachers and their communities at risk.

It isn’t lack of vaccination that is the problem here, it’s a continued and sustained lack of investment and acknowledgment from our government. This was the perfect time to invest in our education system - big recruitment drive to make smaller classes, massive overhaul of school buildings to improve ventilation etc.

But no.

Which is your choice. My DS is 15 and 6ft plus stuck in a small room with other people. I think he should have the choice.

I'm going to be walking mine round the block and force feeding green veg and vitamin D tablets.🤷 What's left?

Bad decision imo.

@mrshoho

I'm pretty sure (hopeful) there will be a u turn on this decision soon enough.

In the meantime it's good news for 12+ vulnerable but I feel for the families of under 12s CEV children who face the prospects of no protection in schools and elsewhere.

Yes, vulnerable primary kids/families were screwed whatever the decision.

I really hope a u-turn doesn't come off the back of worrying data.

I agree that action on mitigation in schools in what is clearly not a short term issue is overdue.
Our scout group seem better led.

@Bordois

spring i don't know, personally I think the choice should be there for all 12+ to be jabbed. But this is a step in the right direction and is a good thing - just wondering why its not being seen that way.

Don’t get me wrong, I am very happy for parents of CV and CEV children.

I just don’t understand the logic in their decision making.

Surely CV and CEV children will be even more protected if their classmates are also protected.

Just like CV and CEV adults are more protected if all adults are protected.

It is good news, I am just interested to know their reasons.

Hopefully all will make sense once the report is out.

My 17 year old ds will be truly pissed off by that. Why within 3 months of your 18th birthday? He doesn’t want being vaccinated to clash with the middle of winter in his A-level year, he wants the vaccine now, so he can get on with focusing on driving tests and year 13 and knowing he’ll not have to worry about travel restrictions for the unvaccinated due to the idiotic timing of when he was finally allowed to be vaccinated. It should be offered to children going into exam years now for those who want it - they are old enough to make their own decisions. Those who don’t want it don’t need to have it.

@Farevalah

I’m glad they’ve reached this decision. DS is 13 and I wouldn't have let him have the vaccine anyway - I don’t think enough is known about the long term side effects so risk possibly outweighs the benefit in vaxxing teens. (Not anti vaccine btw, DH and I are fully jabbed.)

I feel exactly the same.

This decision pleases me, as I was unhappy about my dc receiving the vaccine and this seems like a good middle ground where those who are vulnerable are protected. It is ethically a bit dodgy to vaccinate healthy dc, who are very unlikely to be seriously unwell - not just from the point of view of the balance of risk for them personally, but also because there are vulnerable people in other parts of the world who have not yet received a vaccination.