Reason for vaccinating 12-15

[SoOvethis]

I was listening to Maajid Nawaz yesterday and he said his personal belief for why the government will want to override the JCVI decision not to vaccinate healthy 12-15 year olds is because he thinks the government will want to introduce domestic vaccine passports and they can’t restrict 12 plus year olds unless they have been given the option to have a vaccine!

Anyone else feel this is probably most likely what will happen? As that is already happening in other countries…

Let’s keep in mind that the vaccine is not sterilising - so you can still catch Covid and spread it if you have it with the same amount of viral load as someone who isn’t vaccinated. Also as mentioned before - research is showing that natural immunity is broader and longer lasting.

I don’t mind the vaccine being offered to healthy 12-15 year olds for those who want it as long as my son won’t be at a disadvantage because he has not had it. But I have a bad feeling that this won’t be the case…

The choice isn't between covid and the vaccine.

Its between covid, the vaccine or neither. Not everybody who isn't vaccinated is going to contract covid.

Any other premise is a logical fallacy.

@ZednotZee

The choice isn't between covid and the vaccine.

Its between covid, the vaccine or neither. Not everybody who isn't vaccinated is going to contract covid.

Any other premise is a logical fallacy.

Not really - COVID is endemic, rates are going to skyrocket in schools.

It is unreasonable to present the idea that the majority of children aren't going to be at high risk of (repeated) exposure

Let's see hey?

I don’t really see your point about vaccine passports it would be just as easy to only make them mandatory for over 16s as it would to make it over 12. Personally I think they’re keen to get over 12s done as modelling shows that’s what is needed to provide a high enough percentage of the population vaccinated to have a protective effect for the more vulnerable. There are many negative effects of covid on young people that aren’t about being extremely unwell themselves. If your children are over 12 they should be able to contribute to the decision of whether they’d like a vaccine.

12 is the age of Gilklick competence.

No surprises here.

gillick

@ZednotZee

12 is the age of Gilklick competence.

No surprises here.

No it’s not. It applies to anyone who is under 16 and has been assessed as competent. There is no age guidance

Apologies, my bad.

The guidelines state thirteen for the absence of parental consent
www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-providers/gps/gp-mythbuster-8-gillick-competency-fraser-guidelines

[quote ZednotZee]Apologies, my bad.

The guidelines state thirteen for the absence of parental consent
www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-providers/gps/gp-mythbuster-8-gillick-competency-fraser-guidelines[/quote]
That’s not what it says at all:
“There is no lower age limit for Gillick competence or Fraser guidelines to be applied. That said, it would rarely be appropriate or safe for a child less than 13 years of age to consent to treatment without a parent’s involvement”

Semantics

Involvement/consent.

If a parent is involved, surely that entails gauging their attitude regarding consent to the procedure.

Unless you propose utilising the term 'rarely' to apply to every 12 year old in England meeting the terms of such competence.

The difference is also that children who live with a CEV family member can already be vaccinated if they are over 12!
This is not true. Living with an immunosuppressed person or a CEV under 16 might qualify a 12-15 year old for the vaccine. CEV and effectively vaccinated would not.

[quote SoOvethis]@MontagueLeo
And you are telling me that vaccines are producing long lasting immunity!? Have you seen Israel and it’s reports lately!?
You will end up having a booster every 5/6 months at this rate.[/quote]
They haven’t remotely concluded that immunity wanes to the point that people will need six-monthly boosters, though. As with post-natural infection, some types of antibody become less detectable over time, and initial breakthrough infection more likely, but that’s not the same as the immune system entirely forgetting how to combat the virus and remount its defence, hence the continuing huge reduction of serious illness and death even if infected, even in Israel, which actually has a lower vaccination rate than many other countries, now, anyway, so is less protected from high circulation rates of the virus - just because it started quickly, it doesn’t mean everyone got vaccinated. It’s also pretty weird to assume that with natural infection from covid you gain lifelong, complete immunity from ever getting infected or ill again, too, because that is not thought to be the case, either. So, really, I’d far rather be vaccinated before being infected with the real thing than just risk the real thing, then I have the best all round protection possible at this time. Chances of not being regularly exposed to the risk of catching the virus at the moment are pretty low, after all, so why on earth refuse a vaccination because you are worried you’ll need another vaccination at some point? That doesn’t really make sense.

@olivethegreat

Are other countries giving two doses? We definitely won't. So the international travel will be irrelevant. Eg I was looking at a trip to Germany and over 12s can only get in to the country if vaccinated . But I'm guessing that means double dose ?

It is an incentive tbh, dd wants to visit other countries , cities .

I wonder about the double dose part too for travel

@Walkaround
I didn’t say that you have life long immunity did it!? I said latest research seem to suggest broader and longer lasting immunity.
I am also aware that there isn’t conclusive evidence about the time frame of “needing” a booster. But to me it seems they are just going to decide on a time frame (ie 5/6 months or 8 months like they have said in the USA)
Are you telling me you don’t think they will actually be eventually rolling out continuous boosters for everyone?!
Neither of us can answer that now but I have a suspicion that my thoughts on that will end up being what happens - regardless of what the science says.
Time will tell.

@SoOvethis - logistically and financially, no country in the world is going to want to do this for the entire population forever. At the most, it may become an annual thing for the elderly and immune suppressed, so far fewer people than are offered the flu vaccine annually.

@Walkaround
I genuinely hope you are right. Am not convinced though that that will be how it all pans out. As I said, only time will tell.

@SoOvethis - only time will tell how long the pandemic lasts and how the virus mutates, and what other viruses and antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections come along to threaten us. Human beings don’t tend to stay in crisis mode for very long post-crisis.

Zednotzee

“The choice isn't between covid and the vaccine.

Its between covid, the vaccine or neither. Not everybody who isn't vaccinated is going to contract covid.”

Nothing is black and white, there are always a few outliers but

I absolutely disagree with this.

Delta is hyper infectious and replicates rapidly. I think all British school children are systematically being exposed to this through school. By Christmas maybe they will have all been exposed.

I’m not saying we’ll even know about it for a large chunk of them because it doesn’t seem to cause symptoms.

As you said “we’ll see”

So to clarify for the vast majority I think it is a choice between vaccine or covid.

The title of this thread is Reason to vaccinate 12-15 Yr olds. It has prompted me to do a bit of further reading, and I conclude that at this time there isn't enough compelling evidence to vaccinate them.
Particularly given we don't know how often they will need boosters (each one with a small risk particularly for Boys).

I am pro vaccination for adults.

I totally agree OP!

@everythingthelighttouches do you think with regular LFs we would have a good chance of knowing if our children age group contract it? My dd's secondary has only had a handful of (known) cases this entire time. Is your understanding that Delta is entirely different and so this next term will look different?

Could part of the thinking be then that Delta will spread so quickly there is no point implicating a vaccine programme as it will come too late for most children who are likely to have already caught it, hence the risks therefore do outweigh benefits on a wider school population level?

I was surprised to see the report that 50pc of children have had it. My dd knows no one personally in her secondary who has had it.

But perhaps this is due to asymptomatic?

Of course this approach doesn't help with travel.

olivethegreat

No, I wouldn’t use LFTs as a way to measure the incidence or prevalence in children at all. I would look at the regularly produced ONS reports of community levels of virus and the stratification by age as well as antibody levels.

The government’s own pages show you PCR confirmed cases in your area by age group (there’s a great heat map) but that is only a fraction of real cases.

Delta is different because it is extremely good at replicating and very very quick.

It produces a much higher viral load than most other strains (~1000x higher than the original Wuhan strain).

Because it is so quick, people have it and are putting out high levels of virus particles without knowing it for longer.

It had also been shown to have some immune evasion from antibodies produced from vaccination and infection with a previous variant.

It is still neutralised but it may take longer in some people and until your body starts fighting it, you don’t show any symptoms.

I do think it is already a bit late and wish the JVCI had just said this at the beginning of August (then we could have moved to the position of it being on offer sooner, as expected by end this week or next), but better late than never.

@everythingthelighttouches thank you that's really interesting - and terrifying .