What exactly “vulnerable”? Everyone seems to have an “immunocompromised” child all the sudden, but what risk factors actually matter?
Obviously obesity, but what else? I would have thought Cystic Fibrosis but from what I’ve read they aren’t at additional risk from Covid (which surprised me).
There is NO RCT data on these kids specifically. That I’m aware of.
There’s scarcely any RCT data in kids period.
Insofar as it stands to reason “vulnerable” kids will benefit more from these injections, it also stands to reason they’d be more, well, vulnerable to adverse outcomes.
The crime here (as VP often points out, although crime is my word) is the apparent disinterest in running proper trials to get the answers we need.
Minimal direct benefit and potential for rare risks to outweigh said benefit- exactly. And the NYC data showing negative vaccine efficacy after 30 days (-41 after six weeks) makes this an especially bad deal for 5-11 year old’s. (My hunch is that healthy user bias accounts for the reduction in hospitalizations; it’s predominantly upper-middle class parents vaccinating their kids. And I don’t see how a vaccine that leaves a child more vulnerable to infection could reduce their risk of hospitalization, but I’m not a vaccinologist so maybe this is plausible…)
How refreshing to see a heterodox (i.e., logical) consideration of risks/benefits in print!
Let's be honest: If we lived in a world in which scientific discourse were unencumbered by political/corporate influence, papers like this would have been abundant following the release of the clinical trial results (and probably long before then since it's been obvious from the beginning that (1) long-term risks of the interventions are largely unknown and (2) the benefit is minimal for healthy kids). Isn't the absence of serious discussion of risks/benefits for kids (prior to now) itself an obvious abrogation of medical ethics?
It's remarkable (and scary) that so many people seem get outraged only when they are given permission (or, more accurately, are encouraged). I'm apoplectic about everything that has been done to kids in the past two years. It's so hard to find other parents who are as frustrated as they should be.
Dr. Prasad, if you can see through the farce of encouraging young, healthy, recovered children to get vaccinated against Covid, why do you trust the process and the conclusions coming from govt sponsored studies for ALL of the rushed Covid vaccines?
Why are the FDA fully approved doses largely still unavailable in the US?
What exactly “vulnerable”? Everyone seems to have an “immunocompromised” child all the sudden, but what risk factors actually matter?
Obviously obesity, but what else? I would have thought Cystic Fibrosis but from what I’ve read they aren’t at additional risk from Covid (which surprised me).
Observation regarding vax’ing “vulnerable” kids:
There is NO RCT data on these kids specifically. That I’m aware of.
There’s scarcely any RCT data in kids period.
Insofar as it stands to reason “vulnerable” kids will benefit more from these injections, it also stands to reason they’d be more, well, vulnerable to adverse outcomes.
The crime here (as VP often points out, although crime is my word) is the apparent disinterest in running proper trials to get the answers we need.
Minimal direct benefit and potential for rare risks to outweigh said benefit- exactly. And the NYC data showing negative vaccine efficacy after 30 days (-41 after six weeks) makes this an especially bad deal for 5-11 year old’s. (My hunch is that healthy user bias accounts for the reduction in hospitalizations; it’s predominantly upper-middle class parents vaccinating their kids. And I don’t see how a vaccine that leaves a child more vulnerable to infection could reduce their risk of hospitalization, but I’m not a vaccinologist so maybe this is plausible…)
How refreshing to see a heterodox (i.e., logical) consideration of risks/benefits in print!
Let's be honest: If we lived in a world in which scientific discourse were unencumbered by political/corporate influence, papers like this would have been abundant following the release of the clinical trial results (and probably long before then since it's been obvious from the beginning that (1) long-term risks of the interventions are largely unknown and (2) the benefit is minimal for healthy kids). Isn't the absence of serious discussion of risks/benefits for kids (prior to now) itself an obvious abrogation of medical ethics?
It's remarkable (and scary) that so many people seem get outraged only when they are given permission (or, more accurately, are encouraged). I'm apoplectic about everything that has been done to kids in the past two years. It's so hard to find other parents who are as frustrated as they should be.
Dr. Prasad, if you can see through the farce of encouraging young, healthy, recovered children to get vaccinated against Covid, why do you trust the process and the conclusions coming from govt sponsored studies for ALL of the rushed Covid vaccines?
Why are the FDA fully approved doses largely still unavailable in the US?
https://etana.substack.com/p/bait-and-switch?s=w
VP - it must feel amazing finding out through FOIA that you are on Fauci’s reading list. Hope he reads this one too.