Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

How does a 6 year old know what they are volunteering for ? i don't like this.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Parental consent as always is required.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I am also concerned about the ramifications of such young children being used.

Who will be held responsible if the vaccination has any long term adverse effects.

As a parent I wouldn't be able to live with myself if my decision harmed my child.

Re: Coronavirus
 

How do vaccines on children usually get trialled?

Re: Coronavirus
 

As seen as kids are very rarely affected by COVID, I don’t see the need to vaccinate them, if everyone else is.

And pursuing this action plays into the hands of the tinfoil hat wearers.

You should only vaccinate those that need to be vaccinated.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There are always the firsts in any vaccination program, without it we would not routinely have MMR vaccines for pre-school children.

The trials will be done in a highly controlled way, based on outcomes thoroughly planned for.

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:26 ----------

They may be rarely affected, however, this should not be confused with not infectious.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The same way as adults, children take part in clinical trails all the time.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That’s what I suspected so whatever the usual processes are presumably address the consent issues papa raised and safety issues joglynne alluded to. There’s no reason for this one to go any differently.

Pierre’s point might make decisions around emergency use for low risk age groups different at a later date but it’s no reason to not develop one. Just as usefulness doesn’t drop off a cliff at 65 I’m sure it doesn’t emerge as 16.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Children can (and do) catch covid.
The vast majority survive it just fine (better then us oldies) and have little more than mild symptoms (in many cases, none at all).
I suspect vaccinating them will probably be as much about stopping them catching it and becoming [unknown] spreaders as much as it is about actually protecting them.
After all, once everyone else is protected, they will be the main group the virus can still target.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There’s little evidence to suggest you are not still able to be infectious after being vaccinated asfaik.

So again, pointless.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's extremely early days but the emerging data is actually quite good in Israel, consistent with the CDC decision in the States that fully vaccinated people don't have to self isolate if they encounter a positive case. This would be a huge step forward in giving potential to remove restrictions as vaccinations ramp up here. Assuming we see the same.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The over 65's and 16-64 year olds with certain medical conditions are set to get their jab invites in the next phase (from Monday).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56057402

I'll be interested to see if I get contacted.

Technically [I believe] I come under the 16-64 clinical group - I get offered the flu jab free every year for the same reason.

---------- Post added at 05:00 ---------- Previous post was at 04:51 ----------

In other news, a group of MPs is suggesting all restrictions be removed by May.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56058744

I would love to see this, and they do have some valid points.
However, I'm not sure we will quite be in a position to do that by May.
I think mid summer is a more realistic target for removing many/most of them.
We need to start getting life back towards normal, and business up and running again (those that have managed to survived three+ lockdowns).

Re: Coronavirus
 

Will be useful for my Son, if I can persuade him to go (he is offered the flu jab every year and never goes). However, in the household he is the one working most with the public.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Raab out on the Sundays warning against setting arbitrary timetables which is understandable. They'll want to tip toe out of the restrictions at first monitoring the real world performance of the vaccine. It's not helpful to have deadlines that put political pressure on to measure success/failure of what's ultimately a scientific endeavour and there's no need for unnecessary risks at this stage so late in the day.

By May it'll have been 15 months all the while we should carrying out 8 million vaccinations a month. Paul is right about mid summer being a more realistic target for removing many/most, and at this stage it's more important (I think anyway) that it's a one way street. The time it takes for restrictions to be reintroduced if it went wrong (June), ease (July, optimistically), evaluate outcomes (end August) is months.

A little bit of hesitation and caution now should reap dividends in the long run so that every 6-8 weeks we take a meaningful step closer to normal. The school holidays impact on R will be a good point to push further.