Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

JCVI expected to extend vaccine to 16 and 17 year olds.

205 replies

MareofBeasttown · 04/08/2021 08:42

Good news. As some of us predicted, the JCVI has changed its mind.
This is behind a paywall, but I read the whole article on Twitter ( which I can't seem to paste here).

Anyway, the headline is self-explanatory.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/03/mass-vaccination-children-against-covid-planned/

OP posts:
FizziWater · 04/08/2021 11:38

Not a supply issue. They have an abundance of pfizer, some moderna going to waste. Enough to do all those reluctant under 30s.

I'm glad this group will get the choice, not just for their health, important as it is, but it will avoid all the isolations in crucial exam years. The prospect of them getting to uni without ever sitting proper exams is a worry.

Parker231 · 04/08/2021 11:41

Some good news - hopefully as many as possible will have had at least one vaccination before they are back at school.

herecomesthsun · 04/08/2021 11:43

it's great (but could they not prioritize the clinically vulnerable 12-27 first)?

herecomesthsun · 04/08/2021 11:43

12-17 sorry

fadingfast · 04/08/2021 11:59

@loulouljh

It was originally not recommended due to concerns about severe heart issues as a result. What has changed?
Presumably they are factoring in the much higher risk of heart damage due to contracting Covid?
Cornettoninja · 04/08/2021 12:31

To add to @fadingfast’s post, I believe that it’s also been found that the incidences of myocarditis that have presented have been generally self limiting or easily treatable which isn’t uncommon.

‘Severe’ depends very much on your definition. I would agree any heart inflammation falls under the category of ‘severe’ but in a medical context that might not be true.

Geamhradh · 04/08/2021 12:37

@loulouljh

It was originally not recommended due to concerns about severe heart issues as a result. What has changed?
No. It was not recommended while they evaluated risk factors. They clearly now have.
Booger123 · 04/08/2021 12:44

The JVCI took a long time to come to the no under 18s decision, and now it has u turned after a week. This is not good, and this i feel is political and not health related unless you are at risk.

Westchesterarms · 04/08/2021 12:52

@rottenatthetop

Totally unnecessary to screw this up as well.

I think this is an unnecessarily harsh comment about the JVCI. They've been very clear about how and why they've taken decions up to now. Their delay in approving teenagers for the jab has been because of the data coming out of Israel, notvto mention up weighing up the best use of supply. I think they've been very responsible and haven't screwed up at all.

ihearttc · 04/08/2021 13:02

@Abraxan

I knew someone would pick up on that. It’s clear what I meant. It obviously has an effect on your body as most people who have had Covid and then have the vaccine have significantly worse side effects. I was simply saying that I’m seeing the long term effects on Covid on my previously very first and healthy 16 year old so at the moment I’m reluctant to load his immune system with anything else. I felt truly awful for a month after my vaccine so is it really that surprising that I don’t want him to feel the same.

Saidtoomuch · 04/08/2021 13:07

I'll be relieved when both of my teens are protected. They've both had covid, thankfully mildly, but its going to keep coming back no doubt.

RuleWithAWoodenFoot · 04/08/2021 13:07

I'm glad that parents and teens are at least going to be given the choice.

Yes. That's the key bit.

Parker231 · 04/08/2021 13:07

From Sky News

Do benefits of jabbing children outweigh risks? And why it's not just about stopping them getting ill

The JCVI will have been looking closely at the emerging data from countries that have started to vaccinate under 18s.

Israel began vaccinating 16-18 year olds in January so school exams would not be disrupted. In June, its health ministry said it would start vaccinating 12-15 year olds. Its scientists concluded the benefits of protection from the vaccine outweigh the risks.

In the United States, the Centre For Diseases Control And Prevention (CDC) recommends everyone over the age of 12 should get the COVID vaccination, stressing that the jab is safe and effective.

There had been some cases of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, in adolescents and young adults reported more often after getting the second dose than after the first.

The CDC concluded these reports are rare and the potential benefits of vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks.

And that conclusion has been reached in some countries in Europe too.

France has started vaccinating those from 12 years upwards, provided they have parental consent. Spain plans to start vaccinating children between 12 and 17 years old around two weeks before the academic year starts in September.

We know children are less likely to be affected by COVID than adults. But some children do fall sick and some of these will become very ill.

The government will argue it is better to protect these children too.

But the reason to rollout the vaccine in children is to break the transmission chains in households and more importantly in schools when they reopen for the autumn term.

We know the winter is going to be especially difficult with seasonal respiratory infections rebounding after being largely suppressed last year thanks to lockdown.

So the government will be thinking about ways to reduce the spread of COVID ahead of an expected winter surge.

It was told by the JCVI that it needed more time to study the potential risk to children and now it seems they have seen the evidence and will fall into line with other countries.

Cornettoninja · 04/08/2021 13:14

@Booger123

The JVCI took a long time to come to the no under 18s decision, and now it has u turned after a week. This is not good, and this i feel is political and not health related unless you are at risk.
Maybe it’s better to look at it from the perspective that ongoing data has been reviewed and they have changed their advice accordingly. U-turning implies they had no reason or had incorrect facts behind the previous decision.
Porseb · 04/08/2021 13:14

@herecomesthsun

it's great (but could they not prioritize the clinically vulnerable 12-27 first)?
This group is already prioritised and able to get vaccinated (see JCVI advice around 19th July).
itsgettingwierd · 04/08/2021 13:19

I'm glad teens will have a choice.

My ds is 16 and fully vaccinated due to being on CV list (although neuro said risk is still so small to him thankfully!)

It's nice to know his peers now have the choice he did.

HSHorror · 04/08/2021 13:19

I dont think it was ever the myocarditis.
Because that mainly affected boys so there would have been no justification for girls not to have it.
As pp says the risks to heart from covid are higher than the vax .
And they pushed 40yo women to only have az which was occasionally fatal.

Westchesterarms · 04/08/2021 13:32

The JVCI took a long time to come to the no under 18s decision, and now it has u turned after a week.

I went to the cornershop yesterday where I discovered I'd forgotten my purse. I had to rummage round at the bottom of my bag for change. I bought a loaf, milk and I picked up some beans. I said wait on the beans until I check how much money I have. I counted up and had enough so bought beans as well. That was not a u-turn. That was me being cautious until I had enough info to go ahead with my purchase.

FourTeaFallOut · 04/08/2021 14:11

Ah, well, I am normally happy just to take the lead from the jcvi on their methods for evaluating the safety of vaccines for various populations but if some mnetters have strong feelings on the matter, I'll have to re-evaluate. Hmm

herecomesthsun · 04/08/2021 14:13

well, the MHRA said vaccines were safe to use for 12 -15s.

So that view is upheld by a senior medical body.

herecomesthsun · 04/08/2021 14:26

@porseb sorry, replied on a different thread. The JCVI is only allowing a small number of conditions to be vaccinated age 12-15 and the roll out is painfully slow. Very far from all CEV/CV children and families.

They also took a very long time to come to the (inadequate) decision.

And the kids who are eligible, like my DC, supposedly, can't access the vaccine.

So while there are some positives re the JCVI decision-making (we were fast to get people vaccinated at the start of the year for example), there are also areas where there are strange omissions & delays.

HelloMissus · 04/08/2021 14:27

It’ll be interesting to see the uptake.
The 18-25 has not been as good as hoped.

Piggywaspushed · 04/08/2021 14:51

I think it is actually 24 to 30 where uptake is frustrating. Fairly sure I read recently that it is very good in the 18 to 24 range.

Swipe left for the next trending thread