Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

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

Original poster

Infecting children to protect adults - yay or nay?

293 replies

PrincessNutNuts · 31/10/2021 12:07

"There is an argument for allowing the virus to circulate amongst children
which could provide broader immunity to the children and boost immunity in
adults.”

From the JCVI minutes.

What about you?

Are you in favour of a policy of infecting children to protect adults?

Ok with children suffering illness, going to hospital and dying to protect adults?

Yay or nay?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
Wakemeuuuup · 31/10/2021 12:12

Probably the most stupid thing I've heard

RaoulDufysCat · 31/10/2021 12:17

I am honestly shocked by this. It is beyond awful. Do children not deserve to be protected too?

Mosky · 31/10/2021 12:21

It's not chicken pox which as far as I know has no lasting effects on anyone who gets it as a child.
Covid can cause serious complications in a minority of children.

Waxonwaxoff0 · 31/10/2021 12:21

I'm fine with it as far as my own child goes. He's had it anyway. He's not going to die or end up in hospital. I can't speak for anyone else's child.

I'd rather that than lock them away in the bloody house and force them out of school again to protect adults like we were forced to do in lockdowns.

henlee · 31/10/2021 12:24

@Waxonwaxoff0

I'm fine with it as far as my own child goes. He's had it anyway. He's not going to die or end up in hospital. I can't speak for anyone else's child.

I'd rather that than lock them away in the bloody house and force them out of school again to protect adults like we were forced to do in lockdowns.

The discussion isn't "lock your child away or don't lock your child away"

It's let them gain their first dose of immunity via vaccination, or by infection with coronavirus (whilst not locking them away...)

Sirzy · 31/10/2021 12:25

I would rather vaccinate personally

Waxonwaxoff0 · 31/10/2021 12:25

@henlee vaccines aren't available under 12s though so that's not currently an option.

Personally I wouldn't vaccinate mine anyway.

MorganSeventh · 31/10/2021 12:26

Think you need to provide the context and a link for that quote, otherwise you risk misleading people. I have taken a fair amounts of minutes for government bodies, and officials discussing that there is an argument for a course of action does not mean they are in agreement with that course of action, and certainly does not mean there is a policy to implement it. The JCVI is not a policy-making body; they are an Advisory Committee.

henlee · 31/10/2021 12:27

[quote Waxonwaxoff0]@henlee vaccines aren't available under 12s though so that's not currently an option.

Personally I wouldn't vaccinate mine anyway.[/quote]
The article is discussing the decision made by the JCVI to not offer vaccination to 12-15 year olds and the minutes which has been released. They are now able to get the vaccine, so it is an option.

DeliaDinglehopper · 31/10/2021 12:27

Really upsetting.

noblegiraffe · 31/10/2021 12:27

It seems odd that when they were deciding whether or not to offer the vaccine to 12-15 year olds there was so much emphasis on the fact that it had to be about whether it was of benefit to them, and not to adults around them (so protecting grandma wasn't allowed to be considered as a reason to vaccinate) and yet here they are merrily discussing infecting children with covid in order to protect adults.

It seems to me like they knew what they wanted the decision to be and worked backwards from that.

Languagethoughts · 31/10/2021 12:29

I don't think allowing high levels of infection among children protects anyone!

EducatingArti · 31/10/2021 12:30

According to SAGE, only 20% of child hospital admissions in September had nothing to do with COVID!
Children can and do get I'll enough to need hospital treatment. Although it is only a small minority it is awful to think that spread might be deliberate!

Waxonwaxoff0 · 31/10/2021 12:30

@henlee I see. Well, people have the option to vaccinate their 12-15 year olds if they want so it's a non issue?

herecomesthsun · 31/10/2021 12:33

Chickenpox can cause pneumonia; a few children need hospital admission; a very few children die of it.

www.cdc.gov/chickenpox/about/complications.html

henlee · 31/10/2021 12:33

[quote Waxonwaxoff0]@henlee I see. Well, people have the option to vaccinate their 12-15 year olds if they want so it's a non issue?[/quote]
Well it's not really a non-issue.

By making this decision based on flimsy arguments (evidenced by minutes) they delayed this option for 12-15 years, meaning many have now been infected when they could have been protected by the vaccine and they have generated considerable confusion and uncertainty around vaccination.

And it's a considerable problem that someone this biased was involved in informing policy.

Mindymomo · 31/10/2021 12:37

The trouble is the children are infecting their parents and grandparents.

Ylvamoon · 31/10/2021 12:38

Not good at all. But I guess it's a grey area and needs to be assessed on ethical grounds by people alredy working in health care settings. It is definitely not politicians or highly strung scientists who only look at petri dishes.
We currently don't have a vaccine for younger children, so naturally they will be able to catch it and should follow the rules of isolation in order to protect others.

But with a vaccine available, no way that this is at all acceptable.

Angel2702 · 31/10/2021 12:38

No of course not. Aside from the fact that some kids will become very ill they will also be passing it on to adults.

Having been told yesterday that a colleague is now on a ventilator having caught it from school aged child I think more should be done to prevent cases in children as this is where the main spread is.

noblegiraffe · 31/10/2021 12:44

The JCVI in their May 2021 minutes had one of the arguments against vaccination as parents and teachers would be safe as vaccinated, and that children were unlikely to infect each other.

They were very wrong and it’s worrying that they still thought even then, despite the data, that children didn’t spread it in schools. It makes you wonder how good the rest of their analysis is.

Infecting children to protect adults - yay or nay?
Sean2001 · 31/10/2021 12:46

I think it’s the only way.

Natural infection will give them fuller immunity. Better protection for life.

DockOTheBay · 31/10/2021 12:47

@Mosky

It's not chicken pox which as far as I know has no lasting effects on anyone who gets it as a child. Covid can cause serious complications in a minority of children.
There are around 20 deaths per year in the UK from chickenpox. Source: Oxford Vaccine Centre vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/chickenpox-varicella

There were 25 confirmed deaths from covid in the first 12 months of the pandemic
Source BBC - link to original article in text
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57766717.amp

So pretty similar actually.

DockOTheBay · 31/10/2021 12:47

Apologies those stats are in under 18s, obviously more than 25 covid deaths in the whole population in 2020!

henlee · 31/10/2021 12:49

@Sean2001

You don't end up with better immunity by avoiding vaccination.

It just means you're at higher risk the first time you're infected.

Original poster
PrincessNutNuts · 31/10/2021 12:50

It's 101 child covid deaths now I believe.

And 10,000 children hospitalised.

I don't know how many children have died of covid or been hospitalised with covid since the JCVI had this meeting.

OP posts: