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.

kids won't have to self isolate if there is a case in their class , they'll have to test it daily

Not even that. If they are defined as a close contact (which will not include sitting next to that child in class, it will involve having extensive social contact), then it will be suggested that they take a single PCR.

This decision is effectively going to ban families with children age 12- 17 from travelling to countries that are insisting on only letting in fully vaccinated people.

Tweet regarding the Pfizer vaccine from the inventor of MRNA vaccines.

Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) Tweeted: Many have been asking for this. Pfizer adolescent Risk / benefit calculations based on official CDC data, forwarded to me by an actuary. Please prove these wrong? t.co/Ao8oZXeWGn twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1416426039039909894?s=20

@Nat6999

This decision is effectively going to ban families with children age 12- 17 from travelling to countries that are insisting on only letting in fully vaccinated people.

Which countries are asking for this? From what I’ve read most are accepting a negative test as a condition of entry. Genuine question, Im interested as we have lots of family abroad in various countries.

The vaccination for those within 3 months of 18th birthday is to pick up kids going to university - when they opened up for 18-20 year olds, you could book if you would be 18 by the end of July, leaving the August children to go to university, catch Covid and be ill in their first time living away from home. It also means that there can be no gap between being free from isolating and quarantine because you are under 18, and being free because you are 2 weeks post double-jab.

I hope the Telegraph is wrong and the older 17s and more vulnerable families are just the next tier and that our other DC will be eligible next, but our govt is SO bad that I have no confidence.

If you have a condition which makes you extra anxious about getting Covid in the household, 119 told me that you can ask your doctor to change your DC status to eligible - presumably they will only do that if they think your concerns are correct.

I can't see anything ahead other than Covid ripping through the schools, no isolation for under 18s, so it looks like they are just all going to get it and let's see what Long Covid looks like.

Not all members of the panel will have the same opinion, which is why no single person makes the decision alone.

I wonder, if in a case of a 50/50 split decision, who gets the deciding call on that? Can’t seem to find any information on that in their Code of Practice. Oh well! Just interested to know, I guess.

I think it is a shame. I do want to have the option.
For all those who would not have it, fine, nobody will force you..
But other countries are going with it, and it is not killing children. I would want mine to have it, to have the same protection than adults.
To be honest, I do not buy this that the virus does not affect children, at all. It does. Otherwise, why the heck are they isolating after positive cases? In large numbers. And there IS a proportion of children with SERIOUS symptoms, worst than adults. I do not want to take the risk for the virus to mutate and this PIMS-TS to become more predominant. Or for children to endure long covid symptoms.
Why not protecting them now?

@ChloeDecker

bumbleymummy I have very quickly found the recent study by Gravenor and Friston (02 July 2021) on the UK’s current situation.

According to Gravenor and Friston, an R value between five and seven means that somewhere between 80 and 85 per cent of the population need to be protected from the Delta variant, in order to achieve herd immunity, a considerable jump from the original estimates of 60-70 per cent, with the previous variants.

At face value, this would no longer appear viable given that current government policies do not involve vaccinating children above 12 as standard. Even in the unlikely event of every single adult in the UK receiving the vaccine, this would still only represent 78 per cent of the UK’s 66.7 million population, without including children over 12 in the programme. With children over 12 included, this could be achieved. They could at least try, then, in my opinion.

Such a dilemma though. I’d like to think policy makers would make the right decision but currently looks increasingly unlikely, with their track record.

There was another one saying that we would need 125% of the population vaccinated iirc based on the effectiveness of the vaccine against delta. More double vaccinated people are contracting (and transmitting) the delta variant.

There was another one saying that we would need 125% of the population vaccinated iirc based on the effectiveness of the vaccine against delta. More double vaccinated people are contracting (and transmitting) the delta variant.

Do you know which one? I couldn’t find one (not doubting you, just would like to read it)

I’m trying to remember! It was last week/a couple of weeks ago I think… wired maybe?

@MushMonster that’s simply not true, and scaremongering. Complete with CAPITALS

Read about it. It is true. It does very much exist.
Read about USA vaccinating because of it.
Scaremongering is not allowing people to talk.

@bumbleymummy

I’m trying to remember! It was last week/a couple of weeks ago I think… wired maybe?

Thanks, I looked on Wired but couldn’t find it (but did find the other study). I’ll keep looking

www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00052-1/fulltext

You can start here, if you actually WANT to.

If you do not want your children vaccinated, fine, no problem.

I am worried about this post wave syndromes, and worried about my child. I would rather have the vaccine.

I do not think this is any crime.
Though most people just seem to clutch at this affirmation that it does not affect children at all, ever!

On a personal level I'm very relieved. My teen is delighted. This isn't about holidays or avoiding short periods of isolation for us. This is about lessening the chances of bringing the virus home to an immunosuppressed CEV parent.
I sympathise with @pinkpip100 and I agree that the criteria should include siblings as well as adults.

[quote Aurea]Tweet regarding the Pfizer vaccine from the inventor of MRNA vaccines.

Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) Tweeted: Many have been asking for this. Pfizer adolescent Risk / benefit calculations based on official CDC data, forwarded to me by an actuary. Please prove these wrong? t.co/Ao8oZXeWGn twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1416426039039909894?s=20[/quote]
The problem is these calculations only include death. The are a lot more risks to allow covid to spread than just death.

@pinkpip100 it looks as though children 12+ are eligible if they are living with a CEV person. for you.

No clue what will happen if it’s their teacher that’s vulnerable.

@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.)

Fully agree with this . Risk v benefit .

I think it is a shame. I do want to have the option.
For all those who would not have it, fine, nobody will force you..

It’s this I don’t believe. There will be at least some form of coercion placed on parents to get their children vaccinated if that ends up being the recommendation. It might be vaccine passports being required for children too, it might be isolation being required for unvaccinated but not vaccinated children. It might be being barred from certain venues or activities.

So that’s why I’m far more likely to support the recommendation of a panel of scientists (with differing views among them, who we’ve trusted on other issues) not to routinely vaccinate children. I say “likely” because no one has read their report to understand the reasons yet.

If I genuinely believed there would be a real choice for me as a parent going down a route of people who wanted to vaccinating their children then I’d support it for other people to choose. But I don’t believe that, because of everything that’s happened in relation to the adult campaign and the example of other countries like the US.

It means my eldest will be offered the vaccine due to my husband's medical history. I think it's rotten that other families aren't being allowed to decide for themselves. If it's a supply issue then they should tell us.

aurea

Tweet regarding the Pfizer vaccine from the inventor of MRNA vaccines.

Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) Tweeted: Many have been asking for this. Pfizer adolescent Risk / benefit calculations based on official CDC data, forwarded to me by an actuary. Please prove these wrong? t.co/Ao8oZXeWGn twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1416426039039909894?s=20

Many thanks for posting this. It appears that the risks may indeed outweigh the perceived benefit of vaccinating teens. Certainly something to think about.

Sensible to roll it out to vulnerable 12+ at this point, just like they vaccinated vulnerable adults first) they can add other young people in the future as needed. Our drs has already been doing this where clinically appropriate

The teachers will be jabbed.

It will be interesting to read their reasoning and why the UK has decided against vaccinating 12-17 year olds when other countries am have decided for it.