Does anyone find the JCVI infuriatingly slow?

[nynynynyny]

Their decision making is so slow. They have signed off on boosters for only 500k people.

It's clear we need the booster program to start ASAP. They drag their feet with every decision understandably the urgency to start this seems quite clear.

@wintertravel1980

Could you also explain please how this is best for these children?

Here is a good explanation of why JCVI is very cautious in its recommendations:

mobile.twitter.com/ID_ethics/status/1432878800035991557

Most of CDC (US) information on vaccine side effects that gets posted on twitter by zero Covid proponents is of pretty poor quality.

A more detailed analysis suggests: (i) there is some risk, (ii) the risk appears very, very low, (iii) however, based on the Denge vaccine experience, the population's tolerance for vaccine adverse events impacting children is very close to zero. JCVI are trying to assess whether "very, very low" qualifies as "very close to zero".

It is also worth remembering that children who may suffer from vaccine side effects (healthy, fit teenage boys) are the category that falls into the lowest Covid risk. If we compare potential long-term impact of Covid, of course, at a population level it will be much more damaging but it is not obvious that the statement will remain true for healthy teenage boys with normal BMI.

1. That's discussing myocarditis.

The risk of myocarditis with covid in young people has been said by American paediatricians to be several times greater than the risk from the vaccine.

For example

www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v1#:~:text=So%2C%20the%20risk%20of%20myocarditis,cases%20in%20this%20age%20group.

" Myocarditis (or pericarditis or myopericarditis) from primary COVID19 infection occurred at a rate as high as 450 per million in young males. Young males infected with the virus are up 6 times more likely to develop myocarditis as those who have received the vaccine."

so the cost/ benefit is strongly in favour of the vaccine there

1. I was asking how the plan for immunosuppressed young people make sense.

Any ideas on that are still welcome.

@herecomesthsun

Well, because you smiled very nicely at me, I will reveal this. 😉 I do know that you don't have all the data or inside information needed to make the decisions that the highly qualified members of the JCVI have. Therefore although it is the right of every MNer to question why a decision has or hasn't been made, to criticise it when you're in ignorance of the facts, is very ill-judged thing to do. And a highly qualified person in that area wouldn't do that.

Hmm, I am asking questions that I would like answered.

If I were myself sitting on the JCVI, no I wouldn't do that. I would ask Whitty/ JVT etc myself directly.

However, just because I am on mumsnet doesn't mean that I am uninformed. Quite a few of us have quite a bit of scientific or medical knowledge & experience or a combination.

And I am not attacking the idea of having a JCVI or of having vaccines, but as a mum and speaking to other parents, there appear to be some issues with management of vaccines for vulnerable children.

It is not some sort of heresy to say that.

In fact, it might be a positive thing to say that where it can be heard.

@herecomesthsun. I like to think I'm quite knowledgeable too. In fact just the other day at lunch, I said to Wei Shen... Oops, cat out of the bag. 😉😁

this isn't to do with the science or really the rights or wrongs of vaccinating kids but one thing that annoys me is that I think some of the pro vaccination for kids crowd have an agenda to push it politically to keep aiming for the mythological herd immunity (which we are also told can never be reached).
So in other words, younger healthy teens (that are very low risk for covid and most likely will be asymptomatic) will be pressurized into vaccinations essentially to make up for the adults that have refused.
For that reason alone, I am very reluctant to get my son vaccinated.

I also think that once the 12-15 years have been given the go ahead, the spotlight and resulting pressure will immediately be focused on the under 12's.

Maybe ask him how the plan for third vaccines is supposed to work for immunosuppressed teenagers?

And whether they are supposed to be in a horde of unvaccinated chums at school for all of the winter term? If they are vulnerable enough to need a third dose?

I would (ask him that).

that was to @Haywirecity

I for one am reassured and impressed that the JCVI is not following the herd.
Their recent recommendations (CEV 12-15 and 3rd top-up dose for the immunosuppressive) are wise and proportionate.

What I find infuriating is the apparent lack of critical thinking ability of many who are rushing to receive additional jabs without understanding the potentially negative implications at an individual and wider population level, particularly for their children.

@sashagabadon I thought the mythical herd immunity was about making sure everyone got covid so we could then snap back to 2019 and start being avid consumers of Pret a Manger working out of offices again? While not wearing masks?

*immunosuppressed (autocorrect)

@Vanda189

I for one am reassured and impressed that the JCVI is not following the herd. Their recent recommendations (CEV 12-15 and 3rd top-up dose for the immunosuppressive) are wise and proportionate.

What I find infuriating is the apparent lack of critical thinking ability of many who are rushing to receive additional jabs without understanding the potentially negative implications at an individual and wider population level, particularly for their children.

What additional jabs are people rushing to receive?

(and can I have one please)

and what negative implications are those?

@herecomesthsun. Noted. Although I can say, we've er, they've (giving too much away here. 😉) discussed this and are writing a paper on it for general release. You'll know all the ins and outs very soon.

So there is some point in having a discussion on mumsnet then

The risk of myocarditis with covid in young people has been said by American paediatricians to be several times greater than the risk from the vaccine.

This is one of the "poorly conducted" studies that I mentioned. If it had been produced by PHE, it would have never seen the light of day. It is based on too many assumptions and it does not address the crux of the issue - the outcome for one specific but sizeable group (healthy boys with normal BMI) might in fact be very different from the broader population of 12-15 year olds.

This potentially puts us into the Denge vaccine territory. It is clear that at the population level benefits of both vaccines outweigh risks. However, are those risks "nearly zero" for a group of children in the current situation? JCVI feel they need more information (probably, from the EU since the US data appears incomplete and assumptions driven) to conclude their analysis.

@Haywirecity if you are in the JCVI then it would explain why they're so bloody slow given your on MN all day

You're

@nynynynyny

My sister works at a vaccine centre - they are throwing out batches due to low uptake.

Just offer the booster to all over 50's rather than waste them

I so agree -- what a dreadful waste when there would be many people eager to sign up for a booster shot.

Sunday should be of interest to the nation’s 12-15 year olds, as will the identity of the decision-makers behind the announcement :)

*or maker

@herecomesthsun

So there is some point in having a discussion on mumsnet then

Oh yes, it's all reported back. But my username might give a clue on the efficiency. 😄😄😄

[quote nynynynyny]@Haywirecity if you are in the JCVI then it would explain why they're so bloody slow given your on MN all day [/quote]
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Oh no, you've sussed me out. I'll have to change my username. But I'll be upfront. Thursday is my allotted day to gauge opinion on SM. I'm like the Scarlet Pimpernel, here, there, everywhere. So remember, just like Frasier, "I'm listening." 🤗

I was asking how the plan for immunosuppressed young people make sense.

Sorry, I missed that.

Based on the alama.org.uk risk assessment, an immunosuppressive condition adds 30 years fo Covid age. So an immunosuppressed 15 year old is at the same level of risk as a healthy 45 year old (with 0.1% IFR). The first vaccine dose will reduce the risk further.

While the number is not zero, it is still quite low so I can only assume JCVI have not viewed immunosuppressed teenagers as a high risk group.

They have designated the 3rd dose of vaccine for age 12+. So they have included immunosuppressed teenagers in there.

re SM day, I am wondering whether that is a boon or very tiresome

Never tiresome when you're around @herecomesthsun 😍 Ooo sorry, that was very unprofessional. 😊
Ah but other websites. There's nowhere that is the intellectual equal of MN. 🤭 We pick up all our best strategies from here. (Sorry, what's that Wei Shen? Oh, OK.) Um, allegedly.