5 - 11 year olds to be allowed vaccine in wales

[RedToothBrush]

Adrian Masters @adrianmasters84
1/3 The health minister has confirmed that children aged between 5 and 11 year olds here in Wales will be offered covid vaccinations.

2/3 Eluned Morgan told Senedd Members: “Whilst yet to be published officially by the JCVI, I have received JCVI advice regarding the vaccination of all 5-11 year olds and I have agreed it and we are working with health boards on implementing the offer.”

3/3 There’s been a delay to the official announcement, reportedly because of disagreements between the UK Government and the JCVI. Although it’s thought to have made its decision more than a week ago, the recommendation is not expected to be announced until the 21st February.

I'm in England so I don't know which why the government will go for England on this yet, but it looks likely that all 5 to 11 year olds will be offered the vaccine on a not urgent basis.

I'm not entirely sure how i feel about this nor what i will do.

Its not an issue with travel to most places (there are places its now an issue though) and there are potential implications for travel insurance (you may not be covered for covid related healthcare if you have been offered the vaccine).

I don't know if having it purely for travel purposes in this age group is a good thing or not.

DS is 7. He has had covid.

Genuinely don't know what we will do.

There is always the prospect of a new variant and whether being vaxxed is better for children.

In terms of disruption to school, i think the horse has well and truly bolted on that one.

I don't think im alone in thinking like this and will struggle to know what to do.

@elliejjtiny it was confirmed for England yesterday.

Is it clear that future vaccines will be offered to children though? It may be restricted to vulnerable categories or certain age groups

If they're not going to be given to everyone then it suggests to me that they don't really need it now tbh, we know that 2 doses of the vaccine isn't enough for long term efficacy, hence the massive booster push in adults, the vaccine does not have any significant impact on transmission, Omicron is a much milder varient on what was already mild virus in young ones. I can not see what significant long term benefit there is to vaccinate healthy children. Two of my dc had covid (1 likely Delta 1 likely Omicron given the timings) one was completely asymptomatic the other coughed a few times for one day, both only picked up due to routine testing, neither of them passed it to anyone else in the house. How can I justify vaccinating them to make their non existent symptoms less severe?

How can I justify vaccinating them to make their non existent symptoms less severe?

For me personally it would be to reduce the risk of reinfection (which you 1) can't gurantee will be the same as previous, and 2) there is the possibiblity of long term impacts,

But more importantly, to help build on the current level of immunity they have to ensure they're getting lifelong protection in the safest way possible in the next couple of years.

Not everyone will see it that way, but that's my rationale.

Yes vaccine (and infection) induced immunity wanes, but not to zero. I think this is the key thing - that 10 week figure from the ONS shows that at the 10 week mark protection is at 80%. We have no idea of the trajectory of waning over the long term, but there seems to be an assumption it just disappears, which is unlikely.

But more importantly, to help build on the current level of immunity they have to ensure they're getting lifelong protection in the safest way possible in the next couple of years.
If the vaccines offered lifelong protection then I'm sure I'd have a very different Outlook, yet we're told 2 doses don't last more than a few months let alone a couple of years

@Wellbythebloodyhell

But more importantly, to help build on the current level of immunity they have to ensure they're getting lifelong protection in the safest way possible in the next couple of years. If the vaccines offered lifelong protection then I'm sure I'd have a very different Outlook, yet we're told 2 doses don't last more than a few months let alone a couple of years

Read my reply @Wellbythebloodyhell - I didn't say it did, you've put my quote in bold in your post!

Repeated exposure and repeated vaccination over the next couple of years is what will build life long protection - including vaccination in this helps to do it in the safest way possible.

But more importantly, to help build on the current level of immunity they have to ensure they're getting lifelong protection in the safest way possible in the next couple of years.

Not everyone will see it that way, but that's my rationale.

Yes vaccine (and infection) induced immunity wanes, but not to zero. I think this is the key thing - that 10 week figure from the ONS shows that at the 10 week mark protection is at 80%. We have no idea of the trajectory of waning over the long term, but there seems to be an assumption it just disappears, which is unlikely.

I think of it as water into a leaky bottle. You want to get the level up to the top, but the water will slowly be draining out.

Repeated exposure and infection will keep topping up the bottle, as will vaccination. You want to keep the level high in everyone's bottles and that's how we get to a population level immunity situation.

Vaccination is the safer option to top up the bottle, and adds to the level of pre-existing immunity, which is why I think it makes sense to include it, rather than relying on repeated exposure alone.

It's the same model as for 'flu, but it just isn't an issue like coronavirus because everyone has been exposed from as early when you were in utero, getting your mums antibodies and then repeated exposure once you're born. We'll get there with coronavirus, but it will take a couple more years.

@riveted1

I think of it as water into a leaky bottle. You want to get the level up to the top, but the water will slowly be draining out.

Repeated exposure and infection will keep topping up the bottle, as will vaccination. You want to keep the level high in everyone's bottles and that's how we get to a population level immunity situation.

Vaccination is the safer option to top up the bottle, and adds to the level of pre-existing immunity, which is why I think it makes sense to include it, rather than relying on repeated exposure alone.

It's the same model as for 'flu, but it just isn't an issue like coronavirus because everyone has been exposed from as early when you were in utero, getting your mums antibodies and then repeated exposure once you're born. We'll get there with coronavirus, but it will take a couple more years.

I do agree with you to an extent.

But I am not sure of the value of vaccinating kids in Spring who have recently had Omicrom.

When we get to October / November time then the situation may be different.

So my unvaccinated kids have really quite a lot of water in their slowly leaking bottle at the minute due to recent infection.

In the spring time (i think its April they will start?) it will probably be 3/4 full so still pretty good.

If I get them vaccinated then it will top them up a little.

In autumn it will be half full (or less) vaccinated or not.

If I have had them vaccinated then I may not have any more options. The booster may not be offered. There chance of being seriously ill is a fraction less because they are vaccinated (the numbers really are very low) .

If I haven't had them vaccinated, then I have the choice to get them vaccinated now. Which will top up their protection over the winter but probably unlikely to stop them catching Covid with the current vaccines.

I don't even know if I will get them vaccinated towards the end of the year, but personally I would definitely like to keep that option open. Or if another variant comes along, get them vaccinated then.

The protection figures of 80% are for severe disease not infection though? The current vaccines are brilliant at preventing severe disease not so much at preventing infection? The risk of a child being severely affected is low.

I’m struggling with the benefits of vaccinating at the moment. I will look at it again in autumn if it all kicks off again. I’m hoping (in my optimistic head) that Omicron stays dominant. That we build up lots of immunity and next winter is a lot different to this winter.

If a new more severe variant comes along then I’ll reconsider.

I'm in Wales and there was rejoicing in my house when we heard the news. The pandemic is most certainly not over, despite what #LiarJohnson would have us believe. If/when a new, more dangerous variant comes along, I want my daughter to be protected as far as possible. This will also help protect a CV child in her class, and her teachers.

My daughter is very excited to have the vaccination "at last!" The fact that it will be a "proper" injection rather than up her nose is the icing on the cake for her.

@Delatron

Just reading vaccinations for MMR are down and HPV, what a shame. Far more important than a Covid vaccine for children.

I'm not surprised.

It's not always been straghtforward or easy to get the routine vaccinations in the past two years - for young children or teens for us and family members with children in those age ranges.

@JassyRadlett there isn't extensive data yet, of course, but this study appears to support the idea that second and subsequent infections are milder: www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2108120

And surely if vaccination-induced immunity makes subsequent infections milder i.e. prevents against severe disease - which is generally accepted as being the case - why would naturally-induced immunity result in the opposite?

And surely if vaccination-induced immunity makes subsequent infections milder i.e. prevents against severe disease - which is generally accepted as being the case - why would naturally-induced immunity result in the opposite?

@BlibBlabBlob

I don't think anyone is claiming that immunity from infection would result in more severe reinfection though.

It's more that how ill you get withbcoronvirus is dependent on lots of factors that are out of your control, including viral load and how your body reacts to whatever variant you're infected with. It's therefore possible to have a different response to a second/third/fourth infection, just like you would with 'flu.

Complications like myo/pericariditis also seem unpredictable - this can arise in people with a reinfection who were fine with a previous one, for reasons that we don't fully understand.

The other factor is that immunity from infection is very variable - you may not have any or much protection from a previous infection anyway, depending on how long ago it was.

This is why vaccination is beneficial - to boost whatever exisiting immunity you have, to reduce the risk of illness or long term complications.

@GalesThisMorning

I've just read this thread and would like to applaud *@leafyygreens* for calm, measured, intelligent rebuttals to some of the nonsense being spouted. You've done a great job of clearing waters that are being deliberately muddied. Thanks

Oh thank you @GalesThisMorning!

That's really nice to say, I know it won't make a jot of difference to that particular poster but hopefully it will be useful to others trying to make an informed choice

(or those who have already been vaccinated/had their kids vaccinated and are being terrified by fake claims!)

www.gov.uk/government/publications/jcvi-update-on-advice-for-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-aged-5-to-11/jcvi-statement-on-vaccination-of-children-aged-5-to-11-years-old

JCVI statement on why they have chosen to let this age group get the vaccine non urgently…
Basically you will see they admit it won’t really change the outcome of the current wave. But it’s for a “just in case” scenario of a more severe future wave… which they don’t know if will happen and also they admit they don’t know if it will affect kids more.

Not persuading me to give to my kids who have all already had covid mildly.

Also, they admit vaccinating kids now during omicron wave might not protect them long term from illness but they “think” it will protect from severe illness longer term because of vaccine waning…

For me, the summing up argument from the JCVI basically outlines how I feel about it:

Overall, the committee agreed that the potential health benefits of vaccination are greater than the potential health risks when not including the opportunity costs of a programme to vaccinate all children aged 5 to 11 due to this being part of a pandemic response

On direct health benefits alone, it is better for this age group to be vaccinated than not vaccinated.

The main argument against offering it is not about safety (the main concern of parents) but whether it is justified on a population level, in terms of the costs/resources in rolling it out, when vaccinating children is more intensive (longer appts, specialist centres, staff with extra training).

Given that it's being rolled out and so these costs are sunk, I would personally want my children to benefit from it (if I had DC in this age group - which I do not).

The one thing I keep coming back to is that the jab has not stopped anyone getting COVID particularly with omicron, which is thankfully mild in most cases, so how can they justify giving this vaccine to children? All adults have needed a booster, so how is one or 2 jabs going to protect children? I will not be vaccinating my children.

All adults have needed a booster, so how is one or 2 jabs going to protect children? I will not be vaccinating my children.

Adult immune response is generally worse than children’s. Have we seen data on how immunity in children holds up?

Totally agree @QueenoftheNimbleFlyingCat . I am gobsmacked that parents want to give their healthy children this when it’s not designed for omicron and most children have had it. And as bill gates is now openly admitting omicron is acting like natures vaccine

Here is a link to what was being discussed at a security conference in relation to omicron

twitter.com/statsjamie/status/1494798543709777923?s=21

@Nerdygirl

Totally agree *@QueenoftheNimbleFlyingCat* . I am gobsmacked that parents want to give their healthy children this when it’s not designed for omicron and most children have had it. And as bill gates is now openly admitting omicron is acting like natures vaccine

I think two things are important when considering this out of context statement

1. Bill Gates isn't recommending that children aged 5-11 shouldn't be vaccinated
2. Even if he was - why quote him when you have executive summaries from actual epidemiologists and public health bodies like the JCVI with their recommendations

So when it comes to jcvi based on their recommendations you need to vaccinate 4 million children this age group to avoid 1 in ICU.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/jcvi-update-on-advice-for-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-aged-5-to-11/jcvi-statement-on-vaccination-of-children-aged-5-to-11-years-old

I haven't Jassy - it would be interesting to see, I assume this is what the JCVI is considering though but I haven't seen it.