Vaccine in 12-16 year olds?

[beckypv]

I’m trying to work understand the real reason why 12-16 aren’t currently being offered the vaccine. I know they have said that it is because they are still weighing up the personal risk benefit to the child. Is that actually true? or is it because they are not yet in a position logistically to role it out fully to this age group, or they are actually thinking globally in terms of diverting vaccine resources to the rest of the world?
I ask this because my 12 year old son falls into the general ‘vulnerable category’ because he is on multiple immunosuppressant drugs and will be offered the vaccine soon. We have been told over the last year that JIA kids are no more vulnerable to Covid than other kids, therefore I am concerned he has been put in the vulnerable catagory under a wide sweeping brush and that actually it is no more appropriate for him to have the covid vaccine than other children.
So basically, we want to make to correct decision for him so am trying to understand the science behind not vaccinating children versus the political message.
Hope that makes sense 😀

[quote bumbleymummy]@EarringsandLipstick No, clearly not ‘wrong again’ . You gave the percentage vaccinated for the entire population and the raw figures for under 18s. You just broke it down and found that ~80% of 18-24 are vaccinated, so lower than the older groups, just as I stated. :)

However, the assertion that many are unvaccinated is factually untrue.

I didn’t make this assertion. “Many” is not the same as “most’ though so it is perfectly accurate to say that ‘many’ people haven’t been vaccinated.

Irt vulnerable people catching it from children - The most at risk groups were prioritised for vaccination.

Plenty of studies have shown that immunity after infection lasts 9+ months. (A recent preprint actually found it lasted 12 months)

Based on this, HIQA advised NPHET to extend presumptive immunity to 9 months from 6.

www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2021-06/Duration-of%20protective-immunity-evidence-summary_22-June-2021.pdf[/quote]
Good grief.

And as people have repeatedly told you, the HIQA and everyone else recommend that people with a previous infection still go ahead with vaccination in order to bolster existing immunity.

This has been demonstrated to drastically cut your chances of re-infection.

This has been demonstrated to drastically cut your chances of re-infection.

Do you have a link to that study please?

HIQA themselves don’t actually recommend that (as I’ve pointed out several times-you can read it yourself). The purpose of the above document was to determine how durable immunity was. They are confident that it lasts at least 9 months so I think it’s relevant to earrings’ comment that Immunity is estimated at maximum 9 months post Covid, and is not yet fully know.

Current recommendations in relation to vaccination after infection are based on adult studies. (And vary from country to country wrt to the number of doses) There was a very narrow risk/benefit margin irt vaccinating children. If children are already immune after infection then the risk/benefit is going to be different for them.

@bumbleymummy

This has been demonstrated to drastically cut your chances of re-infection.

Do you have a link to that study please?

HIQA themselves don’t actually recommend that (as I’ve pointed out several times-you can read it yourself). The purpose of the above document was to determine how durable immunity was. They are confident that it lasts at least 9 months so I think it’s relevant to earrings’ comment that Immunity is estimated at maximum 9 months post Covid, and is not yet fully know.

Current recommendations in relation to vaccination after infection are based on adult studies. (And vary from country to country wrt to the number of doses) There was a very narrow risk/benefit margin irt vaccinating children. If children are already immune after infection then the risk/benefit is going to be different for them.

Not the PP but I have seen people link you to this multiple times

It is the study from the CDC presumably.
www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm

In a cohort of people with a previous infection, those unvaccinated were 2.34x less likely to be re-infected with COVID.

grrr

In a cohort of people with a previous infection, those unvaccinated were 2.34x MORE likely to be re-infected with COVID.

Earrings

Can you please point me to the links on Ecdc site as I can’t find UK on it at all

@beckypv
Me to the prof seems like he really wasn’t sure and was pressured into it since when do we make medical decisions based on want and not need 🤷‍♀️Oh wait down and the travistock

And people wonder why some are reluctant and further more why vaccine passports are a awful idea because their making these medical decisions based on poles and political pressure 😳

[quote Mango1982]@beckypv
Me to the prof seems like he really wasn’t sure and was pressured into it since when do we make medical decisions based on want and not need 🤷‍♀️Oh wait down and the travistock

And people wonder why some are reluctant and further more why vaccine passports are a awful idea because their making these medical decisions based on poles and political pressure 😳[/quote]
Vaccine passports are a separate issue and not a reason to not offer vaccination to certain groups.

The evidence demonstrates that it would be beneficial to offer children aged 12-15 the vaccine, and it's not clear why England have made a different decision to Ireland, most of Europe and the US on this.

Any "oh but what if this and that" in terms of long Covid or being unlucky etc disappeared for me (if it was ever there in the first place) when mine had it with virtually no symptoms

No fevers, chills, tiredness, cough, headache, nothing! That's it! They've had worse colds.Don't see the need for a vaccine that "might" cause heart inflammation "particularly on the second dose" etc which is presumably under emergency approval?

@TattyDevine it is excellent your children sailed through but surely you can appreciate that just because they were fine this doesn't mean vaccination should be offered to 12-15 year olds? We know that most kids will be fine, it's not surprising that yours were.

On a balance on risks, the rare odds of severe illness and the potential for long term effects has been considered greater than the rare odds of severe myocarditis. This is why it's being offered pretty much everywhere else in the Western world.

Is it going to be offered though? Or will it become mandatory. That's what I'm wondering.

@Peteycat

Is it going to be offered though? Or will it become mandatory. That's what I'm wondering.

The coronavirus vaccine isn't mandatory @Peteycat and we aren't living in a totalitarian state, despite what your previous posts have said.

I think the key with the vaccination in this group is it reduces spread ie viral load is lower. So maybe more important with those with CV and CEV family members. But also it would significantly reduce spread in schools and the disruption with cases in a none bubble environment which is what they are going back to in Sept.

Mine is just 16 and offered her jab yesterday and we booked for today. She is off to college which pulls from a much wider area in terms of contacts and will have to travel to college by train again much wider exposure. There are alot of factors which have to be taken into account, I have tested positive for Alpha-1 Antitrypsin deficiency which means I do not produce a protein which helps protect my lungs. I suspect she is also positive but we were mid testing when lockdown came. I need to get back on that but its not a critical thing in the scheme of things at the moment so had left it but need to now protect her.

Ollyollyoxen I know it's not mandatory. I asked if it will become that way. So I don't know what you are saying??

I also never said we were living in a totalitarian state. I said sliding into. Don't twist my words. I'll pull you up on it everytime.

Every child I know who has had Covid has had it really mildly i.e. no worse than a cold. I really don't know why people would be rushing to vaccinate children unless there was a specific risk factor. I think the potential side effects of the vaccine outweigh the risk of Covid for most children

I haven't seen any robust research data on long term effects of long-Covid on children.

@Peteycat

Ollyollyoxen I know it's not mandatory. I asked if it will become that way. So I don't know what you are saying??

I also never said we were living in a totalitarian state. I said sliding into. Don't twist my words. I'll pull you up on it everytime.

Ok-dokie

So given the thread title - what exactly is your point? You don't think that children aged 12-15 should be offered the vaccine because you think it will become mandatory?

Vaccinating non CEV 12-17 year olds will kill 1/2 a kid, covid maybe 1/3rd of a kid (probably less) both numbers are completely tiny, the risk is extremely low

Vaccinating CEV 12-17 year olds in the next month will divert millions of doses that could be in use in other places in the world, and would kill maybe 10,000.

That is the reason we should be against vaccinating kids - not the risk or benefit to them, it's the diversion of vaccines away from those more vulnerable.

@sirfredfredgeorge

Vaccinating non CEV 12-17 year olds will kill 1/2 a kid, covid maybe 1/3rd of a kid (probably less) both numbers are completely tiny, the risk is extremely low

Vaccinating CEV 12-17 year olds in the next month will divert millions of doses that could be in use in other places in the world, and would kill maybe 10,000.

That is the reason we should be against vaccinating kids - not the risk or benefit to them, it's the diversion of vaccines away from those more vulnerable.

Interested to see how you got the numbers for the second point that 10,000 people would die otherwise.

Most experts have explained it's far more nuanced than a false dichotomy of "vaccinate healthy kids here which will lead to deaths of others or vaccinate people abroad".

The limiting factor is not vaccine doses - countries need help with funding, setting up infrastructure, cold chains and provisions of rolling out a mass vaccination campaign. Malawi had to destroy thousands of vaccine doses they were donated as they simply weren't able to use them. In addition, many would not be able to make use of pfizer due to it's storage requirements, which is what children are currently offered.

No. I fully understand and agree that CEV children should have the option. That decision should be made with the child, if able to, under the guidance of doctors and specialists. I don't agree that healthy, uncompromised children should have the vaccine, no I don't. The risks outweigh the benefits in my opinion.

But people like you who are dangerously advocating that children should have it, are risking it becoming mandatory because of your selfish opinions. That's what I'm saying.

Meany to say with parents choosing too.

Interested to see how you got the numbers for the second point that 10,000 people would die otherwise

Vaccination success in over 90 year olds, we could get it even higher by just including CEV folks.

of course, that is indeed not practical because targeting the vaccines due to distribution routes, but I am intrigued by your assertion that places like Australia and New Zealand where it's certainly a shortage of vaccines limiting their distribution and not their ability to distribute, or that Australia doesn't have freezers.

I expect its supply issues and that as soon as there's enough supply the UK will change its tune.

They opened up jabs to 12-15 year olds in Finland recently, but they're allowing the children to decide for themselves if the nurse thinks they are competent to. The government is saying we need 80-90% of the population over 12 vaccinated before restrictions can be removed so I certainly hope teenagers get vaccinated. If mine were old enough they would be.

@Peteycat

No. I fully understand and agree that CEV children should have the option. That decision should be made with the child, if able to, under the guidance of doctors and specialists. I don't agree that healthy, uncompromised children should have the vaccine, no I don't. The risks outweigh the benefits in my opinion.

But people like you who are dangerously advocating that children should have it, are risking it becoming mandatory because of your selfish opinions. That's what I'm saying.

@Peteycat

The risks outweigh the benefits in my opinion.
Presumably you haven't see the raw data that allowed experts to come to this decision, and you are not an epidemiologist with appropriate expertise and experience that allows you to make this decision for the general population? Well qualified experts have, and their opinion is that the benefits outweigh the risks, which is why Ireland, the majority of Europe and the US are offering it to children in this age group.

But people like you who are dangerously advocating that children should have it
Nope, not what I'm saying at all - I think children in this age group should be offered it, in line with best scientific evidence.

You hope teenagers are vaccinated with a trial drug? To all those who say it's not a trial. Yes it is, in black and white on government website. No data. Not completed phases.

No Im not an epidemiologist, but then again neither are you.

And what the hell does raw data mean?