11 hours ago, KC 71 said:

????sorry to hear that rattlesnake

Thank you KC. The fact that the victims hardly get any coverage or consideration is just insane.

Just got back from getting my 10 year old son his 2nd Pfizer shot. 8 weeks between 1st and 2nd.

In Canada, FWIW.

No reactions to either shot other than a temp sore arm, same as Dad.

10 hours ago, kwonitoy said:

Just got back from getting my 10 year old son his 2nd Pfizer shot.

Is Moderna available as an option for 10 year olds in Canada?

Yes as our eight year old's private school will only allow students to attend classes at the school if they are vaccinated & he gas been doing remote learning since last May its driving my wife & I insane!!

 

On 1/24/2022 at 8:43 AM, Jeffr2 said:

Spoken like a true anti vaxxer.

 

Guaranteed, most of what the CDC said in the past couple of years was true. Guaranteed. Especially the comment that misinformation is our current biggest health problem.

 

So I'm guessing you don't get annual flu jabs? Upcoming annual flu jabs will soon provide protection against covid also.

"Misinformation" being anything that contradicts the CDC's assertions obviously.

 

No, never had a flu jab and never will. 

2 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

"Misinformation" being anything that contradicts the CDC's assertions obviously.

 

No, never had a flu jab and never will. 

It's not misinformation if it's backed by rational and credible evidence with links from credible sources. Anything else is highly questionable and motives can be reasonably questioned.

3 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

"Misinformation" being anything that contradicts the CDC's assertions obviously.

 

No, never had a flu jab and never will. 

You lost credibility when you said nothing they have said was true. Pure misinformation.

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

It's not misinformation if it's backed by rational and credible evidence with links from credible sources. Anything else is highly questionable and motives can be reasonably questioned.

Which begs the question of what is deemed rational and credible. When qualified and experienced scientists (I can't name them as the post will be deleted) speak against the CDC narrative, they are not publicly invited to debate but rather smeared and refuted in their absence in various articles, on their Wikipedia page etc... This is a clear red flag for anyone who is well versed in politics.

It seems there's a bit of a tiff breaking out between the U.S. CDC and the WHO on the subject of third-dose booster shots (not regular COVID vaccinations) for ages 17 and under, with CDC in favor, and WHO apparently opposed:

 

https://www.healio.com/news/primary-care/20220119/who-finds-no-evidence-that-healthy-children-adolescents-need-boosters

 

WHO finds 'no evidence' that healthy children, adolescents need boosters

 

"WHO recently announced that there is not enough evidence to conclude that healthy children and adolescents require a COVID-19 booster. Instead, the world health agency said that boosters should be reserved for more vulnerable populations.

 

“The aim is to protect the most vulnerable, to protect those at highest risk of severe disease and dying; those are our elderly populations, the immunocompromised, people with underlying conditions and also health care workers,” Soumya Swaminathan, MBBS, MD, WHO chief scientist, said during a recent press briefing.

...

Meanwhile, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recently recommended that adolescents aged 12 to 17 years receive a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at least 5 months after their primary vaccine series."

 

 

A bit oddly, in reading thru the entire report, there was back and forth discussion on the level of COVID health risk to healthy adolescents. But zero mention of whether booster shots would help prevent them from becoming COVID spreaders to others months after their original vaccine doses.

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

(I can't name them as the post will be deleted)

You can't name them here, because the people you would name probably have histories of proven COVID misinformation, conspiracy theories and otherwise being discredited.

 

So, it's probably best that you don't!

 

 

On 1/23/2022 at 9:16 AM, rattlesnake said:

One of my friends' 18 year-old son got myocardytis 3 months ago after the jab and is still crippled by it. A girl I know in her 20s died of a stroke 2 weeks after the jab. I don't want that to happen to me or my kid so a big No Thanks.

 

The last time we had someone post something like that, it turned out to be false.  I suspect this is as well.  Without some substantiation, it most likely is made up.   

 

31 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

It seems there's a bit of a tiff breaking out between the U.S. CDC and the WHO on the subject of third-dose booster shots (not regular COVID vaccinations) for ages 17 and under, with CDC in favor, and WHO apparently opposed:

 

https://www.healio.com/news/primary-care/20220119/who-finds-no-evidence-that-healthy-children-adolescents-need-boosters

 

WHO finds 'no evidence' that healthy children, adolescents need boosters

 

"WHO recently announced that there is not enough evidence to conclude that healthy children and adolescents require a COVID-19 booster. Instead, the world health agency said that boosters should be reserved for more vulnerable populations.

 

“The aim is to protect the most vulnerable, to protect those at highest risk of severe disease and dying; those are our elderly populations, the immunocompromised, people with underlying conditions and also health care workers,” Soumya Swaminathan, MBBS, MD, WHO chief scientist, said during a recent press briefing.

...

Meanwhile, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recently recommended that adolescents aged 12 to 17 years receive a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at least 5 months after their primary vaccine series."

 

The WHO is looking at the pandemic from a much larger perspective than the CDC.  WHO has long advocating for countries to help with vaccinating impoverished countries to stop the pandemic.  The CDC is primarily concerned about the US.   

11 minutes ago, Scott said:

The WHO is looking at the pandemic from a much larger perspective than the CDC.  WHO has long advocating for countries to help with vaccinating impoverished countries to stop the pandemic.  The CDC is primarily concerned about the US.   

 

Absolutely. I posted on that conflict of interests earlier.... the dilemma over limited vaccine supplies for the totally unvaccinated vs vaccines for the already fully vaccinated whose original doses are waning or weren't of very good effectiveness to begin with.

 

The U.S. AFAIK these days has a pretty good supply of available mRNA vaccines, certainly enough to cover those that need and want them including for boosters (leaving aside the roughly one-third of the U.S. population that's still refusing to get fully vaccinated).

 

Many other places in the world, not so much.

 

9 hours ago, ebice said:

Is Moderna available as an option for 10 year olds in Canada?

Not that I'm aware of, Pfizer is the only one that's approved in Canada in the child dosage amounts.

No boosters for the 5-12 age group either, He's had 2 and is done. I hope.

44 minutes ago, Credo said:

The last time we had someone post something like that, it turned out to be false.  I suspect this is as well.  Without some substantiation, it most likely is made up.   

 

Shame on you.

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

You can't name them here, because the people you would name probably have histories of proven COVID misinformation, conspiracy theories and otherwise being discredited.

 

So, it's probably best that you don't!

 

 

There's a name for that, it's called censorship. Those who are censored today are tomorrow's heroes.

1 hour ago, Credo said:

The last time we had someone post something like that, it turned out to be false.  I suspect this is as well.  Without some substantiation, it most likely is made up.   

 

Here is some substantiation for you. Or are you claiming the Thai government is squandering 1 billion on someting that does not exist?

https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2238739/side-effects-cost-govt-b1bn

On 1/23/2022 at 9:16 AM, rattlesnake said:

One of my friends' 18 year-old son got myocardytis 3 months ago after the jab and is still crippled by it. A girl I know in her 20s died of a stroke 2 weeks after the jab. I don't want that to happen to me or my kid so a big No Thanks.

 

I have had Rheumatic Fever and spent a fair amount of time in the hospital as a youngster.  Myocarditis is a part of it.  Myocarditis is simply inflammation of the heart muscle, usually caused by a viral infection.   Myocarditis does not cripple a patient.  It causes, fever, fatigue, and shortness of breath.   

 

Any time your immune system reacts to an infection, one of the first things it does is cause inflammation.  It is our own immune system that actually causes almost all of the symptoms we experience when we are sick.  They cause both inflammation and fever.   

 

Treating myocarditis usually involves first clearing the infection causing it and that is the difficult part.  Once the infection is cleared, the inflammation resolves itself, just like the inflammation that you may have from an infected cut.  It goes away after the infection is gone.   Long term, severe inflammation can cause damage to the muscle, but this is relatively rare and usually happens only in people with an infection that does not clear easily.

 

With regard to the instances of myocarditis after vaccines, it is extremely rare and it usually resolves quickly because it is not associated with an actual infection.  When the immune system is stimulated, it will produce some of the same symptoms as an actual infection but they are much milder -- thus people may get a low grade fever for a short time.   

The instances of myocarditis was first identified in Israel and it affected a very, very small number of people, .002%.  That was 54 cases (as of July, 2021) of those only 10 required hospitalization and none ICU cases.  All resolved with either no or minimal medical intervention.  (reference HERE)  

 

In the US, there have been 300 confirmed cases, so again, extremely rare and very little medical intervention required.  However, if you are not vaccinated, your chances of getting myocarditis are 37 times greater if you catch Covid.   (reference HERE)

 

In addition to to the greatly increased chance of myocarditis, those children who do get Covid also are at risk of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome which causes different parts of the body to become inflamed, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, and gastrointestinal organs. Children who develop MIS-C are much more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit and need medication. There have been at least 5,900 cases of MIS-C causing 52 deaths among children in the U.S. as of Jan. 2022.

 

The general consensus, after looking at all the data, the  CDC recommends that everyone who is eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine should get one. This includes people with heart disease since they are at increased risk for complications from COVID-19. The risks of COVID-19 illness far outweigh the risks of experiencing a rare adverse reaction to vaccination.

 

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

There's a name for that, it's called censorship. Those who are censored today are tomorrow's heroes.

Are you suggesting that lies should remain published because of freedom of speech or some other reason? As I said, they are not lies if some sufficiently CREDIBLE evidence can be proffered. You will notice that your post above regarding side effects has not been censored. The only posts that do get taken down are provably lies. We do see a lot of them.

56 minutes ago, Scott said:

With regard to the instances of myocarditis after vaccines, it is extremely rare and it usually resolves quickly because it is not associated with an actual infection. 

 

Excellent post above. Everything you've recounted matches with everything I've read in medical and science circles on that subject.

 

Extremely rare in connection with vaccinations, usually short-term symptoms and usually resolves without long-term effects, and far far less of a risk than the risks of catching COVID and the ensuing health risks that can entail.

 

From Johns Hopkins latest COVID update for Jan. 25:

 

"VACCINE FOR UNDER-5 CHILDREN Many in the US continue to eagerly wait for the authorization of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine for children under age 5."

 

"More than 250 physicians recently sent a letter to the FDA concerning the issue and suggesting 2 options to expedite the process, such as joint decision making for parents and physicians to immunize children with off-label use of the Pfizer-BioNTech 10 μg dose vaccine formulation or removing the age de-escalation barrier to vaccine approval.

 

"The letter also urges the FDA to review and authorize the Moderna vaccine for children aged 6 months to 5 years as soon as data become available showing the vaccine is safe and effective, arguing the Moderna vaccine offers better protection against the Omicron variant and severe disease than other vaccines."

 

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/resources/COVID-19/COVID-19-SituationReports.html

 

Low confidence in the quality of the safety evidence to date and possibility of adverse effects of the pfizer vaccine for 5-11 years age at this time In other words: far to much risk for the reward.

Phase 3 safety data study results won't be available until May 2026. (A Phase 1/2/3 Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity of an RNA Vaccine Candidate Against COVID-19 in Healthy Children and Young Adults)

There is no need to vaccinate children with this unproven injection with the current status of omicron.

Source:  WHO interim recommendations for use of the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine BNT162b2 vaccine against Covid-19

It's reflective of the WHO's ongoing view as expressed on page 57 of the document you cited:

 

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-vaccines-SAGE-recommendation-BNT162b2-GRADE-ETR-annexes

 

"As a matter of global equity, as
long as many parts of the world are
facing extreme vaccine shortage,
WHO recommends that countries
that have achieved high vaccine
coverage in the high-risk
populations consider global sharing
of BNT162b2 vaccine before
proceeding to vaccination of
children and adolescents who are
at low risk for severe disease."

 

Others take a different view on that.

 

But the same document also says of the Pfizer vaccinations for ages 5-11, on page 53:

 

"BNT162b2 was well tolerated in
children aged 5 to 11 years and
showed a similar pattern to that
seen in those aged 16 to 25 years.
Pain at the injection site, fatigue,
headaches, chills, joint pain and
muscle pain were the most
predominant effects, as well as
fever.

Injection-site pain was the most
common local reaction, occurring in
71 to 74% of BNT162b2 recipients.
Severe injection-site pain after the
first or second dose was reported
in 0.6% of BNT162b2 recipients
and in no placebo recipients.

One serious adverse event in a
BNT162b2 recipient participant
occurred and it was considered to
be unrelated to the vaccine. No
deaths or adverse events leading
to withdrawal were reported.
Post-introduction data, after
administration of 8.7 million doses
to children ages 5–11-years
suggest that the vaccine was well
tolerated.

 

As of 18 December
2021, 12 cases of myocarditis were

observed with a male dominance,
mostly after the second dose.
Reporting rates for males ages 5–
11-years were substantially lower
than for males ages 12–15 and 16–
17-years."

 

 

As for the vaccine safety issue for ages 5-11, this is what the WHO said in their main report as updated Jan 21, 2022.

 

https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1406390/retrieve

 

"A Phase 3 trial was completed in children aged 5-11 years and showed similar immunogenicity and reactogenicity as in young adults. Efficacy against symptomatic disease was 90.7% (CI 67.7; 98.3). No cases of myocarditis were reported among 3,082 trial participants aged 5–11 years with ≥7 days of follow-up after receipt of dose 2, although the study was not powered to assess the risk for myocarditis. Early post-introduction safety data from the U.S. show that the risk of myocarditis is lower in this age group compared to adolescents. No post-introduction vaccine effectiveness studies for the age group 5-11 years are currently available."

 

And further:

 

"Children and adolescents 5-17 years of age
Children 5 -17 years of age with comorbidities that put them at higher risk of serious COVID-19 disease should be offered vaccination.

For healthy children and adolescents, COVID-19 is usually a mild disease. Children can experience significant morbidity such as MIS-C even after mild or asymptomatic infection, but this is rare.

 

In accordance with the WHO Prioritization Roadmap, WHO recommends that countries consider using BNT162b2 in children aged 5- 17 years only when high vaccine coverage (primary series and boosters) has been achieved in the higher priority-use groups.

 

Countries should consider the individual and population benefits of immunising children and adolescents in their specific epidemiological and social context when developing their COVID-19 immunisation policies and programmes (29)."

 

In short, the WHO's issue with younger children vaccinations isn't one of safety, but rather, their view that priority should first be given to risk populations in vaccine lacking countries.

 

If they had any serious vaccine safety issue relating to younger children, they would NOT have included the following in their recommendations, but they did:

 

"Children and adolescents 5-17 years of age
Children 5 -17 years of age with comorbidities that put them at higher risk of serious COVID-19 disease should be offered vaccination."

 

 

On 1/23/2022 at 6:46 PM, Jeffr2 said:

Because we want this pandemic to end. We're tired of it. Sadly, we're all in this together. Sadly.

How will vaccinating kids help the pandemic to end? ... Besides, COVID has already been detected in many animals, which means human to animal transmission is possible (and likely vice versa). Do you want to vaccinate all animals too?

 

Actually some countries are already considering to declare COVID to be an endemic disease (like the flu). Which means at this point it's basically a political choice if we want the pandemic to end. 

10 hours ago, wolf81 said:

How will vaccinating kids help the pandemic to end?  Besides, COVID has already been detected in many animals, which means human to animal transmission is possible (and likely vice versa). Do you want to vaccinate all animals too?

 

Actually some countries are already considering to declare COVID to be an endemic disease (like the flu). Which means at this point it's basically a political choice if we want the pandemic to end. 

I believe that declaring an end to the pandemic is done by the WHO since a pandemic is one that crosses many countries.   

Viral infections have a history of long-term effects.  It should also be noted, there has been a big uptick in diabetes among children who have contracted Covid.  Unfortunately, diabetes is a life-long problem.

9 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

Which begs the question of what is deemed rational and credible. When qualified and experienced scientists (I can't name them as the post will be deleted) speak against the CDC narrative, they are not publicly invited to debate but rather smeared and refuted in their absence in various articles, on their Wikipedia page etc... This is a clear red flag for anyone who is well versed in politics.

You're referencing covid skeptics.  For sure they should be smeared and refuted and banned from participation.  Sad some fall for the misinformation.

 

The CDC has had some missteps.  But this is a NOVEL virus.  New to the world.  New to science.  Takes time to figure things out.  They've done a pretty good job considering all the misinformation floating around on social media.

8 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

There's a name for that, it's called censorship. Those who are censored today are tomorrow's heroes.

Absolutely not true.  Those who are censored today are done so for a very good reason.  Protecting the health of others.  They'll be tomorrows goats.