<Comment deleted by user>
No the vaccine doesn’t cut transmission of the new variant much and we have no long term safety data
We are discussing of the Covid vaccine, correct? Also, by "children" what age range do you mean specifically? Under 13? 0-18? 5-18? 5-12?
<Comment deleted by user>
Oh ok, (I am assuming we are talking about the Covid-19 vaccine, and also I haven't done any research before this so eh)
From what I know of, the youngest age group available for a safe dosage of the vaccine is 12-18, and while the more vulnerable are the oldest (65+) and the youngest (0-8) I still think that people who are eligible and can take the vaccine should take the vaccine, because even if new variants do come and spread, the vaccine will have some efficacy and success.
As more people are vaccinated, the higher chance there will be herd immunity, which protects those who can't take the vaccine or are the most vulnerable.
From what I know of, the youngest age group available for a safe dosage of the vaccine is 12-18, and while the more vulnerable are the oldest (65+) and the youngest (0-8) I still think that people who are eligible and can take the vaccine should take the vaccine, because even if new variants do come and spread, the vaccine will have some efficacy and success.
As more people are vaccinated, the higher chance there will be herd immunity, which protects those who can't take the vaccine or are the most vulnerable.
We have no long term safety data for COVID either, but some children who contracted COVID develop MIS-C, which is a severe inflammation of the brain, kidneys, lungs, heart, and other organs.
Adults, young and adult, are exhibiting actual organ damage months after contracting COVID, even with initial mild symptoms.
And the more unvaccinated people out there, the more the virus has a chance to mutate and become even more dangerous.
Adults, young and adult, are exhibiting actual organ damage months after contracting COVID, even with initial mild symptoms.
And the more unvaccinated people out there, the more the virus has a chance to mutate and become even more dangerous.
@Knight04
So far, data suggests that children under the age of 18 years represent about 8.5% of reported cases, with relatively few deaths compared to other age groups and usually mild disease. And even if children get the virus, it is really unlikely to affect them and it wouldn't affect adults because they are probably already vaccinated. So, I would say no.
So far, data suggests that children under the age of 18 years represent about 8.5% of reported cases, with relatively few deaths compared to other age groups and usually mild disease. And even if children get the virus, it is really unlikely to affect them and it wouldn't affect adults because they are probably already vaccinated. So, I would say no.
@PurePremiumPenguin Polio, smallpox, and pertussis didn't kill a lot of kids either. I'd be a lot more worried about the disease rather than the vaccine if I had children, particularly as the disease continues to mutate.
We can always say it is "unlikely for x to happen" but there is still a chance, there are people with exceptionally weak or sensitive immune systems (of all ages) and still deaths can even occur to those healthy regardless of age.
There are also people who are unable to take the vaccine due to specific reasons, therefore even if your child might be safe from the virus, the child can still be a potential host, and a potential spreader, and eventually from one child, to family members or friends, to then random people of the public, then eventually it will reach someone who is vulnerable of the virus and then that person will go through lots of suffering and perhaps even death.
With the vaccine, the child is more resilient to the virus (and therefore if the child catches it, the child will be able to handle it more easily) and thus make it less possible for the virus to spread, ending that chain I mentioned earlier. With the chain gone, there will be fewer cases and more safety to those unable to receive the vaccine, therefore fewer deaths.
While I am not sure of the exact numbers, I am pretty certain that there is a higher chance of death by Covid-19 than there is dying by the vaccine.
(Also, I don't think there is a vaccine ready for people under 12, therefore I can only assume we are talking between ages 12 - 16/17)
There are also people who are unable to take the vaccine due to specific reasons, therefore even if your child might be safe from the virus, the child can still be a potential host, and a potential spreader, and eventually from one child, to family members or friends, to then random people of the public, then eventually it will reach someone who is vulnerable of the virus and then that person will go through lots of suffering and perhaps even death.
With the vaccine, the child is more resilient to the virus (and therefore if the child catches it, the child will be able to handle it more easily) and thus make it less possible for the virus to spread, ending that chain I mentioned earlier. With the chain gone, there will be fewer cases and more safety to those unable to receive the vaccine, therefore fewer deaths.
While I am not sure of the exact numbers, I am pretty certain that there is a higher chance of death by Covid-19 than there is dying by the vaccine.
(Also, I don't think there is a vaccine ready for people under 12, therefore I can only assume we are talking between ages 12 - 16/17)
@PurePremiumPenguin The mortality rate for all demos save for the very elderly is actually extremely small, factoring for the sheer presence of co-morbidities (the methodology for counting covid deaths is statistically broken) and the unreliability of PCR testing, among other things.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.