No vaccines for healthy 12-15 Yr olds

[Wellbythebloodyhell]

news.sky.com/story/covid-19-vaccines-will-not-be-recommended-for-healthy-children-aged-12-to-15-government-advisers-say-12398444

Is anyone else glad this potential decision has been taken away? I was very much undecided about vaccinating my older dc and now feel a bit of a weight has been lifted now its not something I need to consider.

I don't understand how on one hand people are using personal choice and wants to justify vaccination for children, but on the other hand a person in their 20s with no underlying health conditions or risk factors who doesn't want to be vaccinated is called all the names under the sun and people are calling for them to be excluded from certain parts of society.

If it's 'personal choice when the science isn't settled on clear risks / benefits' then surely that should apply to all.

And before anyone accuses me of misquoting them, I'm referring to:

Given the very low risk of serious COVID-19 disease in otherwise healthy 12 to 15 year olds, considerations on the potential harms and benefits of vaccination are very finely balanced and a precautionary approach was agreed.

As longer-term data on potential adverse reactions accumulates, greater certainty may allow for a reconsideration of the benefits and harms. This data may not be available for several months.

(Or 2025 - 2027 when the Pfizer reports on long term harms are due to be released...)

The Delta cases sequenced in England showed 180,000 unvaccinated U50s caught it and 72 died, 0.04%. Since that number includes people we know are high risk, if you aren't personally high risk then the risks are undoubtedly lower.

I don't see how personal choice and your own views on safety and wider 'disruption' type benefits are fine for children but not a twenty-something with no underlying conditions, a healthy bmi, and antibodies from previous infection.

So on reflection I'm fine with personal choice, as long as those choosing not to aren't coerced into getting it by having their lives restricted.

I think to be fair the JCVI are saying the known risk of covid is higher than the known risks of vaccines but not by much

The vaccine's job is to reduce those covid risks, so it's about how well the vaccine reduces the risk of covid for children (the health benefit) weighed against risks of the vaccine, not the risk of covid versus risk of vaccine.

Given that one of the risks of covid is long covid, it's inexplicable that they haven't addressed it.

In my opinion and my 15-year old’s opinion, it is in his interests to be vaccinated in his GCSE year. It may not be in children’s interests in future years, but this year, certainly, after so much disruption already, I think it is. I’m not ignoring expert opinion on this - expert opinion in the US and EU agrees with me that children this age should be vaccinated. The JCVI on the other hand have said they are not equipped to consider all the relevant issues and have shoved the consideration of some of the relevant issues elsewhere, so why should I respect their delaying tactics over the decisions of plenty of other experts? There is no way vaccination could be made compulsory in this age group given the JCVI standpoint, but there is absolutely no justification for refusing a choice.

I don’t understand why some people are so upset about a voluntary vaccine. Let those who want it have it and those who don’t want it can choose not to have it.

The ones who choose not to have will be demonised as antivaxxers scums. I can only imagine the pressure for the teens.

@Walkaround

In my opinion and my 15-year old’s opinion, it is in his interests to be vaccinated in his GCSE year. It may not be in children’s interests in future years, but this year, certainly, after so much disruption already, I think it is. I’m not ignoring expert opinion on this - expert opinion in the US and EU agrees with me that children this age should be vaccinated. The JCVI on the other hand have said they are not equipped to consider all the relevant issues and have shoved the consideration of some of the relevant issues elsewhere, so why should I respect their delaying tactics over the decisions of plenty of other experts? There is no way vaccination could be made compulsory in this age group given the JCVI standpoint, but there is absolutely no justification for refusing a choice.

Are you sure he’s not already immune? Perhaps an antibody test would give him a bit of reassurance if he’s worried about disruption this year?

@Islamorada - I’ve never noticed parents shunning the parents and children who have refused the flu vaccine.

Noble the jcvi did address long covid and said they could not attrbute the symptoms kids have had to covid

It’s currently supposedly personal choice for adults, but those who are choosing not to have the vaccine are being abused, labelled anti vaxxers (even if they’ve had all other vaccines), called selfish, denied entry to places. Can we be sure that won’t happen to teens too?

The JCVI estimate half of kids in this age group have had covid and now at risk kids have been offered vaccinated

Majoirty of kids who died had very severe vulnerabilities and so will be offered vaccination.

Only 30 kids in UK have died of covid and hardly any (if any?) have been healthy.

Long term covid in kids is less frequent than adults, mild with most recovering quickly and most symptoms haven't even been linked to covid yet.

Their concern is that we know the vaccine is ok at time goes on - their worry is that they dont know the long term risks of the vaccine side effects - they know the kids recover quickly but the data isnt there to support how it will affect them long term etc.

I'm nt expert - but neither are people on here. The JCVI have the data. Ignoring them and following the government advice (which will act in society interest not for our kids) is just bad parenting

Kids will not suffer disruption. If half kids have had it the rest may get it once. No isolation of contacts. How on earth will they be disrupted? Those kids who get it are largely asymptomatic so wont even have a test to know they've got it

Vaccinated adults are more likely to have mild illness if they even have symptoms (still vast majority of adults are asymptomatic) so cases will lead to very little disruption

It is the right decision in my view.

The mRNA vaccines are totally untested, no one knows what the long term implications yet. There is one thing in rolling out vaccines that are untested to adults that have some degree of risk of covid/long covid/ but totally irresponsible to vaccinate children with an untested vaccine with no data given their risk of being seriously ill is so tiny.

The words that stood out to me in the statement were:

"there is still considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude of the potential harms"

And this is spot on, we have no idea about the magnitude of potential harms to our children. We have no data at all.

It is very brave for those choosing to vaccinate their children, definitely worth it if your children are CEV but we will be holding off until we have more data, much more data.
We are pro vaccine, and double vaccinated and we will have any shots offered to us. Our risk profile is totally different to that of our children, so we are assessing each individually as everyone should.

The government are hell bent on getting immunity up, understandably, but I am not comfortable with the lack of data.

@bumbleymummy - it’s possible my entire family could have had entirely asymptomatic covid at some point in the last 2 years, but I think fairly unlikely. We have all been in exceptionally rude health for the last 2 years. I’m also the only person in my family who has had to isolate at any point due to known close contact. Tbh, I don’t see the point in an antibody test, as it won’t change our behaviour - we’re going to come into contact with covid regardless of antibodies, because we are not hiding away. Also, one teenage relative of mine has had confirmed covid twice and tested positive for antibodies in April 2020. If you have a vaccine, you have a more clear idea of when your protection is likely to have started and how quickly it will be waning, and if you’ve already had covid, the vaccine boosts your natural protection, so still no argument for refusing vaccines to those willing to have them.

But of course we know this is different. People don’t tend to ask if others have had their flu vaccine, it’s not on their radar. This will be. We have posts on here regularly about whether people should visit their unvaccinated hairdresser, whether they should allow their unvaccinated young adult child to visit etc. We don’t have that with the flu vaccine, so it’s clear the two are incomparable.

@CoopsMalloops

The amount of parents in here annoyed at the decision is staggering.

My mind is completely blown as to why you would want to give your child a medical intervention with less than 12 months data.

Don’t worry though, I’m sure the government will go ahead with it.

Because the scientists have been working on Sars vaccines for 20 years? You do know the flu vaccine changes every year?

Any teen or child that does not want the vaccine should simply say they are waiting for the latest data to be published before having the vaccine. We will know in 3-6 months time the fatality rates for myocarditis and if the condition is permanent/damage to the tissue is irreversible. This is very important data, and will be a deciding factor for us. The other consideration is the long term unknown harms to children, but there is no need to get into that with people you hardly know.

I can't think anyone would have a problem with that position. It is the cautious and considered choice after all, and one that many parents and children are taking. I don't think kids will be labelled anything, as I think the take up will be far far more limited than what we have seen to now, for obvious reasons.

It is a massive responsibility to give healthy children a vaccine that is untested, and one most people are not taking lightly.

@Watapalava

Noble the jcvi did address long covid and said they could not attrbute the symptoms kids have had to covid

That’s not what they said. They said some symptoms, the more nebulous ones like mild fatigue, palpitations, could be due to stress/anxiety caused by lockdown.

However, there are a lot of very physical symptoms that can remain after covid, that are a direct result of the coronavirus infection.

Ds had covid (and that alone was pretty horrible for him - close to non stop cough, burning chest, fever of 40 degrees). He then developed mis-c (which can affect internal organs, and did in his case). It left him with physical damage, and problems that could be seen on scans and blood tests.

His consultant absolutely could attribute his symptoms to covid, and so can the gps and consultants working with other kids who have long covid.

@FfrothiCoffi

But of course we know this is different. People don’t tend to ask if others have had their flu vaccine, it’s not on their radar. This will be. We have posts on here regularly about whether people should visit their unvaccinated hairdresser, whether they should allow their unvaccinated young adult child to visit etc. We don’t have that with the flu vaccine, so it’s clear the two are incomparable.

Of course they are incomparable - because we have a covid pandemic, not a flu pandemic. Society is patently affected by individuals’ decisions during a pandemic.

Because the scientists have been working on Sars vaccines for 20 years?

This is incorrect.

mRNA vaccines have never been used before full stop, they are entirely brand new and this is effectively an experiment - the first one of its kind. You are referring to the AZ vaccine which was 20 years in the making and used with SARS. The two vaccines, and their components are entirely different. Please research the differences.

Yes, but you were the one who compared the reactions to people refusing the flu vaccine to the potential reactions to people refusing the Covid vaccine, when we know there is no comparison to be made.
People don’t tend to care whether others have the flu vaccine or not (not sure why, as it’s a very serious and potentially deadly virus). People will care if others have had the Covid vaccine or not.

Long term covid in kids is less frequent than adults, mild with most recovering quickly

It's interesting, Wat, that you have just given more analysis on long covid in kids than the JCVI.

the jcvi did address long covid and said they could not attrbute the symptoms kids have had to covid

Can you point to the bit in the report where they said this?

@severelysound

I don't understand how on one hand people are using personal choice and wants to justify vaccination for children, but on the other hand a person in their 20s with no underlying health conditions or risk factors who doesn't want to be vaccinated is called all the names under the sun and people are calling for them to be excluded from certain parts of society.

If it's 'personal choice when the science isn't settled on clear risks / benefits' then surely that should apply to all.

And before anyone accuses me of misquoting them, I'm referring to:

Given the very low risk of serious COVID-19 disease in otherwise healthy 12 to 15 year olds, considerations on the potential harms and benefits of vaccination are very finely balanced and a precautionary approach was agreed.

As longer-term data on potential adverse reactions accumulates, greater certainty may allow for a reconsideration of the benefits and harms. This data may not be available for several months.

(Or 2025 - 2027 when the Pfizer reports on long term harms are due to be released...)

The Delta cases sequenced in England showed 180,000 unvaccinated U50s caught it and 72 died, 0.04%. Since that number includes people we know are high risk, if you aren't personally high risk then the risks are undoubtedly lower.

I don't see how personal choice and your own views on safety and wider 'disruption' type benefits are fine for children but not a twenty-something with no underlying conditions, a healthy bmi, and antibodies from previous infection.

So on reflection I'm fine with personal choice, as long as those choosing not to aren't coerced into getting it by having their lives restricted.

Totally agree. The priority factor is and should always be personal choice.

Long covid is extremely rare in children, and in most cases resolves in 3-6 months to a full recovery, and when we counter the potential long term harm to our children using an untested vaccine, I would probably argue long covid would be the better/safer option, particularly when comparing to the swelling of the heart as a side effect which can be fatal in some cases.

I am amazed so many parents would dismiss the concerns of world class scientists that have spent more than a year researching and agonising over this decision, and their expertise, knowledge and understanding is second to none. Versus Gavin Williamson bleating he wants to keep schools open so we need to vaccinate children. Gavin has a perilous grip on his career,and prospects, and would do anything to avoid a car crash in schools this autumn, so maybe the ministers motivations do not have the best interests of our children at heart (with one eye on the economy and the other on the teaching unions)

t is a real eye opener reading this thread.

I know who I trust, and it ain't Gavin

@FfrothiCoffi

Yes, but you were the one who compared the reactions to people refusing the flu vaccine to the potential reactions to people refusing the Covid vaccine, when we know there is no comparison to be made. People don’t tend to care whether others have the flu vaccine or not (not sure why, as it’s a very serious and potentially deadly virus). People will care if others have had the Covid vaccine or not.

@FfrothiCoffi - yes, because I was making the point that it is not automatic that people make a fuss about someone being an anti-vaxxer just because they have refused to have a specific vaccine. I would be very surprised if the reaction to 12-15 year olds refusing the covid vaccine is remotely as strong as it is for older people post-the JCVI doubts, despite the existence of a pandemic - unless it is proven, as with the flu, that children are superspreaders, which seems unlikely after 2 years of telling everyone very forcefully that this is not the case.

Long covid is extremely rare in children, and in most cases resolves in 3-6 months to a full recovery, and when we counter the potential long term harm to our children using an untested vaccine, I would probably argue long covid would be the better/safer option

Another analysis that hasn't been done by the JCVI.

I am so confused about why these 'world class scientists' have done such a shit job of laying out their working.

The biggest study in the world has been published, and the results for long covid in children are very reassuring:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58410584

I don't think long covid is a reason to vaccinate after reading the study, but it is a personal choice for all parents.