COVID-19

Not to mention, we don't know how safe the vaccine actually is either. Certainly, there are accounts out there which articulate instances of concern that don't seem to get much in the way of media coverage. within the last 2 weeks alone, the CDC have gone from denying any risk of heart inflammation for those under 30 to admitting there is an increased risk.

My children have nothing to fear from covid, according to every bit of data and info out there. Theres not a cat in hells chance that otherwise healthy children should be given an experimental vaccine from an illness that isn't a significant threat to them.

 

Faithful Bantam said "My children have nothing to fear from covid, according to every bit of data and info out there. Theres not a cat in hells chance that otherwise healthy children should be given an experimental vaccine from an illness that isn't a significant threat to them".

#1078146 minutes ago

The purpose of the vaccine is threefold. 1. To reduce the chances of people catching the virus. 2. To reduce the severity of illness if they do catch it. 3. to reduce the chances of them passing it on to others. So the more people who get vaccinated the better.

The fact that some people show no symptoms when they catch the virus doesn't necessarily mean it is doing them no harm. There are now plenty of examples of people being initially asymptomatic then developing long Covid months later. There are also various studies investigating the concern that the virus can cause long term damage in asymptomatic people which could damage their resistance to disease later in life. So the idea that children have nothing to fear from catching the virus is unproven.

 

But I don't keep going on about the vaccine being harmless. I simply don't know. Although I do know that vaccines in general have a very good safety record, unlike viruses. It's a massive assumption to say that the vaccine is harmless to those who show no symptoms, especially when we already know that some asymptomatic people have developed delayed Long Covid.

 

My mum is one of those that was asymptomatic and now has Long Covid.

 

Just heard the government are going to make vaccines compulsory for care home staff and are then looking at doing same for NHS staff too

 

Very interested to see the usual suspects pipe up on here about that.

iTs NoT SAfE. WhAt AbOUt ChOicE.

I bet not one of those people have actually bothered to educate themselves on whether or not its actually safe, rather than just whinge about it on the prime epidemiology forum bantam talk.

 

Are you not arguing against your own point a bit, especially when it comes to children?

We have no long term data on covid to work on for the implications and we also have no long term data on the vaccine. We have other vaccines we can judge and also other viruses but that's obviously imperfect. So without nailed on information either way we can all have a preference but based purely on data there's no right and wrong.

For the record I've had 1 shot and both my kids are fully vaccinated so I have no actual axe to grind apart from the point that lack of long term data does go both ways.

 

Yes, just seen that report on Calendar. Significant numbers of kids developing long Covid. So the bland assumption that the virus is harmless to kids and young adults is clearly mistaken.

 

Of course the argument goes both ways. We know that there are a small minority of people who've had clotting problems. There are risks either way. But we know that the vaccines have beneficial effects for most people in reducing contraction, seriousness and spreading. By contrast, I'm not aware of there being any positive benefits whatsoever to catching the virus, so it's not an equivalent comparison.

I haven't been on here every day banging on about how the vaccines are totally harmless, unlike some people who appear to have made that assumption about the virus in asymptomatic people, despite some evidence to the contrary.

 

The fact that there are risks either way is literally the only thing that needs to be acknowledged, everything else falls into place from there. The balance is therefore upto the individual.

I mean, in theory being infected gives you some sort of immunity which could be seen as a positive....not without risks of course or with perfect data but it is there.

Some people aren't that worried about long covid in general (I'm currently not) and that's not to say that it can't be bad but it isn't the main focus and the number of symptoms that classify as "long covid" doesn't really help to provide that clarity.

 

I can only go by what Chris Whitty has previously said, and the only positive he can out forward for vaccination of children is about not disrupting school classes.

This is from April.

At the Downing Street press conference on Monday, Chris Whitty reminded the public that one of the only good things about the coronavirus pandemic is that children are, largely, unaffected by serious disease.

But, as the chief medical officer said, this raises its own ethical issues. Medical authorities and ministers would want to be “absolutely confident” that a vaccine was “highly safe” before giving it to the under-18s.

Put simply, should younger people have a vaccine they do not need themselves, if there is a risk – however tiny – that the jab itself can harm them?


I know some of you want to pump children full of vaccine because it will make you feel safer but if there is no immediate risk to children it surely is far better to understand the long term effects on them first.

For people over the age of 40 where the risk/reward is clear and tests have been done on adults since day one, testing in children is way behind that of where it is with adults, and very few children have had the vaccine so data is limited, compared with millions of doses administered to Adults so we have a far stronger data.

If all you can throw in at this stage is potential less disruption at school, then there really isn't solid data to push forward with this.

 

You obviously didn't see the report on Calendar tonight about the monies being made available to assist the growing number of kids suffering from Long Covid. Or do you think that they are just making it up?

BTW I'm not saying we should be rushing to vaccinate all our kids. Merely pointing out that your persistent claims that Covid is harmless to kids is quite clearly an incorrect assumption.

 

The fact that some people aren't worried about long Covid doesn't alter the fact that it exists, and is known to affect kids.

 

Not sure on what point you are trying to get across. Do you think it is safe?

 

Chris Whitty reminded the public that one of the only good things about the coronavirus pandemic is that children are, largely, unaffected by serious disease.

It's not my claim, unless you want to take it up with Chris Whitty.

We have a semi known and an unknown. Testing of vaccines is way behind on children thats an absolute fact.

 

100% but it isn't going to affect their decision making if they aren't worried about it.

 

As the quote is from almost two months ago maybe he has changed his mind since then with the new evidence of long COVID effecting children