To Vaccinate or Not---The Rat Flu Odyssey Continues

[Danno]

Clearly, the answer isn't clear. However, it seems the evidence leans toward lesser transmission and much less impact for small children. Still should utilize common sense and practice masking, social distancing, isolation from the most fragile people and the things that are blatantly obvious. But I would be reluctant to get a 3 y.o. and 5 y.o vaxxed at this time. But that's me and, as noted, I'm not advising anyone else of anything in this regard.

"Limited evidence suggests that transmission by preadolescent children occurs but is uncommon in educational or child care settings, particularly if the class size is small, other public health measures are strictly followed, and community transmission is low [15,59,68,71,81,89-100], although this finding is inconsistent [101]. In contrast, several studies have documented transmission by adolescents in high school or secondary school [71-73], but this finding is also inconsistent [91]."

https://www.uptodate.com/contents/co...is-in-children

Even if everything you say is true, and we don't need to worry about transmission much or serious consequences to children (BTW, death is not the only measure of the consequences), isn't the calculus still more than that? Isn't it a risk-benefit analysis of the vaccine vs getting/transmitting covid? So wouldn't there/shouldn't there be some decent evidence AGAINST vaccinating a child compared to the risk of getting/transmitting covid? Everything I have seen about the vaccines, in both adults and children (to the extent it has been studied) is that it is remarkably safe, and regardless of where you peg the risk of covid (in adults or kids), the risk/benefit data seems to weigh heavily in favor of vaccination.

I mean, the risk to my kiddo from flu is quite low (not likely to get it, not likely to die if she does get it), but I still get her a flu shot every year. Because even though the risk from flu is small, the risk from the flu shot is extremely low and data shows that there is a benefit to receiving the shot that outweighs both the risk from flu and the risk from the flu shot.

[muted reborn]

Feels like I'm stoned at work today after a morning 2nd dose of Moderna. Kind of enjoyable really.

I may have to concentrate a bit to drive home though.

[Buster Highmen]

Clearly, the answer isn't clear. However, it seems the evidence leans toward lesser transmission and much less impact for small children. Still should utilize common sense and practice masking, social distancing, isolation from the most fragile people and the things that are blatantly obvious. But I would be reluctant to get a 3 y.o. and 5 y.o vaxxed at this time. But that's me and, as noted, I'm not advising anyone else of anything in this regard.

"Limited evidence suggests that transmission by preadolescent children occurs but is uncommon in educational or child care settings, particularly if the class size is small, other public health measures are strictly followed, and community transmission is low [15,59,68,71,81,89-100], although this finding is inconsistent [101]. In contrast, several studies have documented transmission by adolescents in high school or secondary school [71-73], but this finding is also inconsistent [91]."

https://www.uptodate.com/contents/co...is-in-children

Excuse me, but that's a fairly shitty piece of evidence with all the apologies for the inconsistency.

[Art Shirk]

I hope they do require this vaccine for kids to attend school. Put your feelings aside and listen to scientists and doctors. 99.99% of any permanent side affects of vaccines show up within 6 weeks of dose. EUA vs. full approval is about time. Do you understand one of the reasons the vaccine was able to be developed so quickly was companies were given a blank check for the work? We would be hearing about major side affects by now if there were any. 260 million does of vaccine administered in US and no scientific evidence of permanent side affects.

Also, I'll quote Old Goat: "KIDS CAN SPREAD IT TO PEOPLE MORE LIKELY TO DIE. THE POINT OF VACCINATION IS NOT JUST TO PROTECT THE RECIPIENT BUT TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY AND STOP THE SPREAD OF THE VIRUS SO WE CAN GO BACK TO LIVING OUR LIVES."
My neighbor has lung cancer and his doctor advised him against the vaccine for now. I don't want a neighborhood kid to accidentally kill one of the best human beings I know.

Don't want your kids vaccinated? That's your choice. Send them to the private school that will fire teachers who get the vaccine. You'll fit right in...

Spot on IMO. And I am pretty over the whole "rushed" claim as if this vaccine wasn't produced on the back of decades of mRNA research for other ailments. It would be like me claiming the new Volvo wasn't safe because, well, its the 2021 model and we've never had one of those before!

[old goat]

In my home county, in 0-9 years old, we've had 2061 cases out of about 44,000 total cases. Of the 2061, zero deaths. In the 10-19 years old, 4500 cases, 3 deaths and 20-29 year old, 8700 cases, 2 deaths. Hard to guess what the long-term effects of catching the virus might be for little kids but death certainly doesn't seem to be a real threat. I personally wouldn't get the shot for young kids but I'm certainly not advising anyone what to do.

ETA: OG is probably going to fry me for this answer but the kids haven't been the problem. That's why elementary schools have been open longer than other schools and is seems they don't tend to spread it, either so not sure I agree with his answer.

Consider yourself fried.

Yeah...not advising any one what to do either. GOAT...all of the other vaccines given to children have FULL FDA approval. Not just emergency use....if you go back and read the thread, there are a couple places that links to the difference was posted. I counted.

I'm good with any mandatory vaccination waiting for full FDA approval, which is just around the corner. I heard on the TV that the FDA wants 5 months of safety data. I don't know if that's correct. Pfizer just applied.

Clearly, the answer isn't clear. However, it seems the evidence leans toward lesser transmission and much less impact for small children. Still should utilize common sense and practice masking, social distancing, isolation from the most fragile people and the things that are blatantly obvious. But I would be reluctant to get a 3 y.o. and 5 y.o vaxxed at this time. But that's me and, as noted, I'm not advising anyone else of anything in this regard.

"Limited evidence suggests that transmission by preadolescent children occurs but is uncommon in educational or child care settings, particularly if the class size is small, other public health measures are strictly followed, and community transmission is low [15,59,68,71,81,89-100], although this finding is inconsistent [101]. In contrast, several studies have documented transmission by adolescents in high school or secondary school [71-73], but this finding is also inconsistent [91]."

https://www.uptodate.com/contents/co...is-in-children

"Limited evidence suggests that transmission by preadolescent children occurs but is uncommon in educational or child care settings, particularly if the class size is small, other public health measures are strictly followed, and community transmission is low."
Transmission being uncommon in educational or child care settings isn't the same as a kid giving the Covid to their grandparent.
Getting rid of reduced class sizes, distancing, and masks at school will depend on vaccination.

Truly containing the pandemic will depend on vaccinating as many people of all ages as possible, although I agree that small kids are a lower priority. Definitely middle-high school. Recent outbreak at Truckee High for example. The more teens and adults that are vaccinated the less important vaccinating younger kids will be.

[Buster Highmen]

How many times does it have to be rererreiterated that masks, sd and vaccines are largely for the benefit of all, not the inDUHvidual.

Granted, being a parent makes us defensive and particularly for those < 4, but I still think grade schools should not be in person.

[MontuckyFried]

I mean, the risk to my kiddo from flu is quite low (not likely to get it, not likely to die if she does get it), but I still get her a flu shot every year. Because even though the risk from flu is small, the risk from the flu shot is extremely low and data shows that there is a benefit to receiving the shot that outweighs both the risk from flu and the risk from the flu shot.

Yes, but you have ~80 years of data from which to draw your conclusion. Flu vaccine's been widely available since the 1940s. This is year 0 for data on COVID vaccines and children, let alone MRNA. I know things are looking VERY promising and we're all excited about the technology, as well as potentially reaching peak societal protection as fast possible, but please forgive those of us who may have some questions before jumping in feet first. If you want to let your children be the first to test it out, then be my guests. Not telling anybody not to go for it.

[uglymoney]

On Point just happened to talk about Kids and Covid today!

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2021/05...-be-vaccinated

I'm getting our 11 yo vaccinated asap. No brainer for us. Of course it will be a while for her so if I had parental anxiety the wait and see might be reassuring since the 12 yo's go first.

Amongst the experts panel on the show if the adult vaxx consensus is golf ball precise I'd say for kids it is more like a muddy softball. Certainly there are a lot of things to think over.

Or you could say the upside down nature of this virus complicates the easy conclusions.

We do know a 15 yo with long haul covid. Didn't kill him but he has some super wierd stuff going on.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[MontuckyFried]

Spot on IMO. And I am pretty over the whole "rushed" claim as if this vaccine wasn't produced on the back of decades of mRNA research for other ailments. It would be like me claiming the new Volvo wasn't safe because, well, its the 2021 model and we've never had one of those before!

Yes, and Volvos are sooper safe, but even Volvo says not to put your kids in the front seat where they'll be killed by an airbag meant for an adult. Volvo also doesn't say to just toss your kid in the back without taking into consideration their height/weight, for which they tell you to use the appropriate child seat or booster. My point being, just because something has been deemed safe for adults doesn't mean it's been approved for kids, or at least as is. Volvos are safe for kids WITH the appropriate measures (backseat + correct additional protection). Vaccines are no different. Sure. They can be safe, but for the COVID shot, we need to make sure what those correct and appropriate standards for kids should be.

Kids are different. They have different physiology altogether. This is why this needs to be studied long term. Will they receive different doses? Different ingredients? Would you use the same shot on a 4 year old weighing 40 lbs that a 10 year old weighing 70 lbs that a 50 year old weighing 200 lbs gets? Who knows? I know they're working on these things feverishly (no pun intended) as we speak, so I'm sure we'll have answers on these things as time goes on.

[Mofro261]

Clearly, the answer isn't clear. However, it seems the evidence leans toward lesser transmission and much less impact for small children. Still should utilize common sense and practice masking, social distancing, isolation from the most fragile people and the things that are blatantly obvious. But I would be reluctant to get a 3 y.o. and 5 y.o vaxxed at this time. But that's me and, as noted, I'm not advising anyone else of anything in this regard.

"Limited evidence suggests that transmission by preadolescent children occurs but is uncommon in educational or child care settings, particularly if the class size is small, other public health measures are strictly followed, and community transmission is low [15,59,68,71,81,89-100], although this finding is inconsistent [101]. In contrast, several studies have documented transmission by adolescents in high school or secondary school [71-73], but this finding is also inconsistent [91]."

https://www.uptodate.com/contents/co...is-in-children

You're reluctance was to have kids in the first place, you have none, so you not vaccinating your nonexistent children based on your ignorance luckily won't have any impact on the rest of us. Other people choosing not to vaccinate along the lines that the prevention is worse than the disease are also woefully misguided.

For those with kids, or those with a desire for a deeper understanding than golddigger here is capable of- a few articles about kids being as transmissible as adults with the new variants, long term COVID-19 complications in children following COVID-19, and the linkage between COVID-19 and increased diabetes (I and II) diagnosis in adults and children post COVID-19.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/2021...covid-variants

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...irus-children/

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/art...es-of-covid-19

https://fortune.com/2021/05/05/diabe...ects-children/

[Danno]

Yes, but you have ~80 years of data from which to draw your conclusion. Flu vaccine's been widely available since the 1940s. This is year 0 for data on COVID vaccines and children, let alone MRNA. I know things are looking VERY promising and we're all excited about the technology, as well as potentially reaching peak societal protection as fast possible, but please forgive those of us who may have some questions before jumping in feet first. If you want to let your children be the first to test it out, then be my guests. Not telling anybody not to go for it.

Not surprising that you latch on to one thing not central to my point, and then support your point with fear mongering. My point was that it is risk-benefit analysis, not whether the covid vaccine is the same as the flu shot.

There is a hudge amount of data, getting hudger every day, showing that the covid vaccinations are safe. Like anything, they are not perfectly 100% safe, but safe. There is no contrary data that I have seen, and thousands of kids and millions upon millions of adults have received the vaccine. By the time my kid's turn comes, there will likely be millions of other kids who have received it. Regardless of whether the risk of covid is low for children, the risk from the vaccine seems to be MUCH MUCH lower. So the decision analysis isn't simply "what is my kid's risk (and society's risk from my kid) from covid", it is "what is my kid's risk (and society's risk from my kid) from covid, compared to the risk of the vaccine to my kid". And I simply have not seen evidence, just fear mongering, that the calculus weighs in favor of not vaccinating.

[GoldMember]

Even if everything you say is true, and we don't need to worry about transmission much or serious consequences to children (BTW, death is not the only measure of the consequences), isn't the calculus still more than that? Isn't it a risk-benefit analysis of the vaccine vs getting/transmitting covid? So wouldn't there/shouldn't there be some decent evidence AGAINST vaccinating a child compared to the risk of getting/transmitting covid? Everything I have seen about the vaccines, in both adults and children (to the extent it has been studied) is that it is remarkably safe, and regardless of where you peg the risk of covid (in adults or kids), the risk/benefit data seems to weigh heavily in favor of vaccination.

I mean, the risk to my kiddo from flu is quite low (not likely to get it, not likely to die if she does get it), but I still get her a flu shot every year. Because even though the risk from flu is small, the risk from the flu shot is extremely low and data shows that there is a benefit to receiving the shot that outweighs both the risk from flu and the risk from the flu shot.

I don't know if what I said was true, it's only surmising what truth MIGHT be with limited evidence. As I noted, I'd be reluctant but I'm not telling others what to do. To my knowledge, there's no clinical studies on kids 0-5 years old. I'm probably wrong on that but I'm not aware of any. If it was me, I'd at least like to see the data from studies and perhaps let it ride for a month or two after EUA for that age before I'd get my kid vaxxed.

Excuse me, but that's a fairly shitty piece of evidence with all the apologies for the inconsistency.

Yes, and what do you have that supports this vaccine in this age bracket? Of course it's shitty evidence as there's scant little out there to draw from. Hence, the reluctance until more is known for that age bracket.

Consider yourself fried.


I'm good with any mandatory vaccination waiting for full FDA approval, which is just around the corner. I heard on the TV that the FDA wants 5 months of safety data. I don't know if that's correct. Pfizer just applied.



"Limited evidence suggests that transmission by preadolescent children occurs but is uncommon in educational or child care settings, particularly if the class size is small, other public health measures are strictly followed, and community transmission is low."
Transmission being uncommon in educational or child care settings isn't the same as a kid giving the Covid to their grandparent.
Getting rid of reduced class sizes, distancing, and masks at school will depend on vaccination.

Truly containing the pandemic will depend on vaccinating as many people of all ages as possible, although I agree that small kids are a lower priority. Definitely middle-high school. Recent outbreak at Truckee High for example. The more teens and adults that are vaccinated the less important vaccinating younger kids will be.

If I had kids 12-15, yes, I'd get them vaxxed as soon as possible due to the prevalence in that age bracket. Little kids, 0-5 I have a more reluctant sense of.

How many times does it have to be rererreiterated that masks, sd and vaccines are largely for the benefit of all, not the inDUHvidual.

Granted, being a parent makes us defensive and particularly for those < 4, but I still think grade schools should not be in person.

And that's fine. There are arguments both in favor of and against in-person schooling but if we follow the State's guidelines at this point, the DOH feels in-person is doable with the proper protocols in place. I don't necessarily have an opinion on that and would likely follow the State's guidance.

You're reluctance was to have kids in the first place, you have none, so you not vaccinating your nonexistent children based on your ignorance luckily won't have any impact on the rest of us. Other people choosing not to vaccinate along the lines that the prevention is worse than the disease are also woefully misguided.

For those with kids, or those with a desire for a deeper understanding than golddigger here is capable of- a few articles about kids being as transmissible as adults with the new variants, long term COVID-19 complications in children following COVID-19, and the linkage between COVID-19 and increased diabetes (I and II) diagnosis in adults and children post COVID-19.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/2021...covid-variants

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...irus-children/

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/art...es-of-covid-19

https://fortune.com/2021/05/05/diabe...ects-children/

I wasn't reluctant to have kids in the first place; we weren't able to have kids. It's a bit different. I happen to like kids and have several nieces/nephews and friends' kids who I adore. I would have liked to have kids when we were young but that view changed over time in addition to my wife not being able.

Yes, I get that the variants are much more threatening and that they are more transmissible than the original. That's a good point of consideration, I don't disagree.

And thank you for the links, much better information than I was accessing. As for your slanted ad hominen comments directed toward me, this is a huge part of what's wrong in the country today. For the most part, I respect and admire what you do and appreciate it but you really lower my opinion when you sink to lows throwing insulting innuendo out into the discussion. Why is it that people can't have honest discussions and sharing of facts/opinions in this country anymore? It's because of belittlement of others over differences of opinion. I would hope for an open exchange of information and ideas. It should be beneath you to participate in the fashion you chose.

[Harry]

There's still people who read his posts in the Covid threads?

I’m his best friend IRL and even I have him on ignore...


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Danno]

I’m his best friend IRL and even I have him on ignore...

quoted for hilarity

[PNWbrit]

to my knowledge, there's no clinical studies on kids 0-5 years old. I'm probably wrong on that.

Yep, you're wrong on that.

https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical-trials/children

https://medicine.yale.edu/news-artic...oceed-at-yale/

[Buster Highmen]

Yes, and what do you have that supports this vaccine in this age bracket? Of course it's shitty evidence as there's scant little out there to draw from. Hence, the reluctance until more is known for that age bracket.

See Mofros list.

Also:

And that's fine. There are arguments both in favor of and against in-person schooling but if we follow the State's guidelines at this point, the DOH feels in-person is doable with the proper protocols in place. I don't necessarily have an opinion on that and would likely follow the State's guidance.

Kids, even at high school ages do not have the self awareness to follow those guidelines. Those ns/protocols are vacuous.
I have a jumior in hs and she has the self awareness to not do in person, despite hating the online school. She's the first to tell you that any protocols are totally out the window.

As for your slanted ad hominen comments directed toward me, this is a huge part of what's wrong in the country today. For the most part, I respect and admire what you do and appreciate it but you really lower my opinion when you sink to lows throwing insulting innuendo out into the discussion. Why is it that people can't have honest discussions and sharing of facts/opinions in this country anymore? It's because of belittlement of others over differences of opinion. I would hope for an open exchange of information and ideas. It should be beneath you to participate in the fashion you chose.

I hope I didn't convey that and agree that it's fundamental to the national and cultural division we have dans les Etats Unis.. With obvious exceptions, I try not to be snotty or dismissive in that way anymore. But some people are just too over the top.

[GoldMember]

I hope I didn't convey that and agree that it's fundamental to the national and cultural division we have dans les Etats Unis.. With obvious exceptions, I try not to be snotty or dismissive in that way anymore. But some people are just too over the top.

No, not you.

[GoldMember]

Yep, you're wrong on that.

https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical-trials/children

https://medicine.yale.edu/news-artic...oceed-at-yale/

I'll rephrase my comment; to my knowledge, there are no completed clinical studies on kids 0-5. In other words, I haven't seen the clinical evidence regarding the overall safety at this point. Are we expecting great things? I certainly hope so and am very encouraged by all we've seen to date with the vaccines but the data has yet to be compiled for the youngest trial patients. My initial phrasing may have been confusing.

[Ted Striker]

I’m his best friend IRL and even I have him on ignore...


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

omg that's funny

[Buster Highmen]

I have read that there's a Korean study that seems to indicate that kids < 10 are not as susceptible to covid.

The current hypothesis is that there's some enzyme that the virus needs to be as invasive that is not present in young kids.

That's just one study though. I've also read that transmissions of school age kids in London is significant which may have to do with the variant present.

Anyway, everything is some risk/reward calculation and I'm more concerned about covid from a personal as well as social perspective than the vaccines.

[PNWbrit]

I'll rephrase my comment; to my knowledge, there are no completed clinical studies on kids 0-5.

And that's why no one is giving to that age group yet... when they're finished you'll be free to misinterpret the data and come to your own conclusions though.

My initial phrasing may have been confusing.

"there's no clinical studies on kids 0-5 years old"

Seemed pretty cut and dried. Even if it should have been "there are no..."

[GoldMember]

"there's no clinical studies on kids 0-5 years old"


Seemed pretty cut and dried. Even if it should have been "there are no..."

Typing too fast and not proof reading. I'm actually trying to get some work done while debating with you mooks. Sorry.

[Danno]

I'll rephrase my comment; to my knowledge, there are no completed clinical studies on kids 0-5. In other words, I haven't seen the clinical evidence regarding the overall safety at this point. Are we expecting great things? I certainly hope so and am very encouraged by all we've seen to date with the vaccines but the data has yet to be compiled for the youngest trial patients. My initial phrasing may have been confusing.

Of course there aren't complete clinical trials. We weren't jabbing all the adults before we had those either.

At the point that 0-5 year olds are eligible to be vaccinated (I'm assuming that happens), there will be completed studies. So, if your sole point is that you would not have a 4 year old vaccinated right now, but will if the trials are concluded and the data looks good, well then, wow, you went through an awful lot of mental gymnastics to get there. Because I would say the same.

If, however, your point is that when those trials are concluded, even if the data says the same as it had for the adults, you still think kids shouldn't be vaccinated, then why are you trying to hide behind science if your opinion isn't based in science?

[Mofro261]

I
Yes, I get that the variants are much more threatening and that they are more transmissible than the original. That's a good point of consideration, I don't disagree.

And thank you for the links, much better information than I was accessing. As for your slanted ad hominen comments directed toward me, this is a huge part of what's wrong in the country today. For the most part, I respect and admire what you do and appreciate it but you really lower my opinion when you sink to lows throwing insulting innuendo out into the discussion. Why is it that people can't have honest discussions and sharing of facts/opinions in this country anymore? It's because of belittlement of others over differences of opinion. I would hope for an open exchange of information and ideas. It should be beneath you to participate in the fashion you chose.

Yeah sorry you are not a special snowflake, and having an opinion based on a lack of knowledge (ignorance) doesn't give you or anyone else a pass, or in any way equal footing with opinions grounded in fact. It makes YOU the problem for spreading mis-information under the guise of "well my opinion is valid too". Sure everyone is entitled to there own opinion; no one is entitled to have that opinion respected or considered valid in the absence of facts or evidence to back it up, spreading mis-information is more dangerous than keeping ones mouth shut.

What is insulting is throwing out "kids don't die from COVID-19" as a binary outcome for vaccination as if that was the only meaningful tracking statistic when there is a wealth of information suggesting otherwise. It's been 15 months of whack-a-mole and I don't have the patience to pretend to be nice anymore.

I'll rephrase my comment; to my knowledge, there are no completed clinical studies on kids 0-5. In other words, I haven't seen the clinical evidence regarding the overall safety at this point. Are we expecting great things? I certainly hope so and am very encouraged by all we've seen to date with the vaccines but the data has yet to be compiled for the youngest trial patients. My initial phrasing may have been confusing.

No knowledge, haven't seen the evidence, but still has an opinion they feel is valid enough to share with others.

Exactly my point.

[PNWbrit]

"there's no clinical studies on kids 0-5 years old"


Seemed pretty cut and dried. Even if it should have been "there are no..."

Typing too fast and not proof reading. I'm actually trying to get some work done while debating with you mooks. Sorry.

Mooks?

Definition of mook
slang
: a foolish, insignificant, or contemptible person

You're arguing with Mofro on this subject while running a... roofing company... isn't it?

Stick to flashing.