Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Pfizer for teens?
Replies
-
I know I'll get some bask lash for this but maybe ask why get the jab for something that is 99.8x survivable?
Are the side effects or long term effects worth it?
4 -
Also, is it ethical for wealthy countries to start vaccinating low risk children, while developing countries need vaccines for their elderly people?
Also, when the "wealthy" country has suffered 600,000 deaths, I think it needs to do whatever it can to get the pandemic under control, which includes vaccinating children to help stop community spread.7 -
I know I'll get some bask lash for this but maybe ask why get the jab for something that is 99.8x survivable?
Are the side effects or long term effects worth it?
Where do people keep getting this 99.8 number from? It's simply not true. Death rate from COVID cases in the U.S. is 1.8 percent according to Johns Hopkins. It's much higher in other countries...9.4 percent in Mexico.
This doesn't even account for severe cases with hospitalization, where people survived but have lasting effects.
600,000 people have died in the U.S. and 3.7 million worldwide.
The risk of long-term effects from the vaccine (which there is no evidence of) is far smaller than your risk of getting COVID and passing it around to others, who may be more vulnerable to severe disease than you are.
I am at low risk personally, but got vaccinated for my family and my community.
Here's the Johns Hopkins mortality analysis if you're interested:
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
10 -
I think he's saying that for 12-15 year olds, not total population? I definitely agree that the risks and side effects of the vaccine for certain age groups are worth it...like I said before, statistics showed clearly that the over 65 are mostly at risk for hospitalizations and death and working age people are the primary ones spreading it.SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I know I'll get some bask lash for this but maybe ask why get the jab for something that is 99.8x survivable?
Are the side effects or long term effects worth it?
Where do people keep getting this 99.8 number from? It's simply not true. Death rate from COVID cases in the U.S. is 1.8 percent according to Johns Hopkins. It's much higher in other countries...9.4 percent in Mexico.
This doesn't even account for severe cases with hospitalization, where people survived but have lasting effects.
600,000 people have died in the U.S. and 3.7 million worldwide.
The risk of long-term effects from the vaccine (which there is no evidence of) is far smaller than your risk of getting COVID and passing it around to others, who may be more vulnerable to severe disease than you are.
I am at low risk personally, but got vaccinated for my family and my community.
Here's the Johns Hopkins mortality analysis if you're interested:
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
0 -
I know I'll get some bask lash for this but maybe ask why get the jab for something that is 99.8x survivable?
Are the side effects or long term effects worth it?
What side effects or long-term effects are associated with the Pfizer mRNA vaccine? Why are you ranking those as greater than the risks of spending a few nights in ICU, or a few days being ventilated? Have you heard about the long-haulers, people whose symptom last months?9 -
World hunger takes this topic to whole new level! I hope if anything good comes from covid, it'll be that global health issues are a little less invisible to some people.Also, is it ethical for wealthy countries to start vaccinating low risk children, while developing countries need vaccines for their elderly people?
Yes this is not a simple moral dilemma. There are 25000 ppl in the world dying daily from hunger (10000 children). There are also simply treatable diseases many ppl in third world unnecessarily are dying from. In this context it doesn't sounds as dilemma but cynicism.
On the other hand and if it helps to challenge the dilemma...i have to add that there are ppl that cannot be vaccinated between us. Currently we need to achieve more than 80%( new mutations) to have a chance to protect them and unfortunately without children this is not possible.
0 -
I think he's saying that for 12-15 year olds, not total population? I definitely agree that the risks and side effects of the vaccine for certain age groups are worth it...like I said before, statistics showed clearly that the over 65 are mostly at risk for hospitalizations and death and working age people are the primary ones spreading it.SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I know I'll get some bask lash for this but maybe ask why get the jab for something that is 99.8x survivable?
Are the side effects or long term effects worth it?
Where do people keep getting this 99.8 number from? It's simply not true. Death rate from COVID cases in the U.S. is 1.8 percent according to Johns Hopkins. It's much higher in other countries...9.4 percent in Mexico.
This doesn't even account for severe cases with hospitalization, where people survived but have lasting effects.
600,000 people have died in the U.S. and 3.7 million worldwide.
The risk of long-term effects from the vaccine (which there is no evidence of) is far smaller than your risk of getting COVID and passing it around to others, who may be more vulnerable to severe disease than you are.
I am at low risk personally, but got vaccinated for my family and my community.
Here's the Johns Hopkins mortality analysis if you're interested:
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
I'm not sure that's what he was saying, as I keep hearing that number from people (99.8 percent survivable!!) as a general argument against vaccines, restrictions, etc. But, you're right, I just assumed that.
As stated though, this is not just about individual risk. We are not vaccinating children JUST to protect them. We need to stop the community spread among all age groups in order to protect the vulnerable and prevent the rise of variants that are more resistant to our current vaccines. The more it spreads, the more likely it mutates.
7 -
I understand what you all are saying. I still think that we should focus on elderly people and working age people first, and observe what happens long term with the vaccines before messing with the kids, the ones without comorbidities that is. If enough adults are vaccinated it will somewhat protect kids and those that are unable to get vaccinated because of health problems.2
-
I understand what you all are saying. I still think that we should focus on elderly people and working age people first, and observe what happens long term with the vaccines before messing with the kids, the ones without comorbidities that is. If enough adults are vaccinated it will somewhat protect kids and those that are unable to get vaccinated because of health problems.
Genuine question for you, or anyone else who wants to "wait and see". How long do you think we should wait? For people concerned about "long-term" side effects of the vaccine...what does long-term mean to you? A year? 5 years? 10 years? When would you be comfortable enough with it's safety to say that it's worth letting kids get vaccinated?
6 -
For me personally, I'm waiting until this August when school starts, and if I'm comfortable with it at that point, then I'll let my daughter decide. The plus side for that is we might have more options by then as Moderna will probably be approved for kids. Ideally, I'd like to see a full FDA approval beforehand.SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I understand what you all are saying. I still think that we should focus on elderly people and working age people first, and observe what happens long term with the vaccines before messing with the kids, the ones without comorbidities that is. If enough adults are vaccinated it will somewhat protect kids and those that are unable to get vaccinated because of health problems.
Genuine question for you, or anyone else who wants to "wait and see". How long do you think we should wait? For people concerned about "long-term" side effects of the vaccine...what does long-term mean to you? A year? 5 years? 10 years? When would you be comfortable enough with it's safety to say that it's worth letting kids get vaccinated?
1 -
I think the numbers of kids in the clinical trials were sort of low. Maybe I'm worried more about that than the time frame. I mean I know it has to be tested on someone's kids for us to see any downsides, and all my respect to parents and kids who are brave enough to be the first ones. I'm just not one them!1
-
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
How long do you think we should wait? For people concerned about "long-term" side effects of the vaccine...what does long-term mean to you? A year? 5 years? 10 years?
But we already know about many long term consequences for ppl with serious course of a disease. There are already stats. Also from other viruses we know, that there are very common consequences that shows up after years (e.g. by MMR viruses). So it's not only about dead rate. Additionally to the direct victims of virus there are people dying because of limited health care during peaks.
People concerned about long-term side effects are ignoring all known and talking about something that may exists with very very very low probability.1 -
I understand what you all are saying. I still think that we should focus on elderly people and working age people first, and observe what happens long term with the vaccines before messing with the kids, the ones without comorbidities that is. If enough adults are vaccinated it will somewhat protect kids and those that are unable to get vaccinated because of health problems.
What you seem to be missing, or are purposely ignoring, is that those who are not vaccinated (including kids) can be vectors for the virus to mutate and evade current vaccines, thereby putting elderly (and everyone else) at risk again.
You are twisting yourself in knots here trying to frame your choice as the ethical one, but it just isn't. You are relying on other people to do the right thing to "somewhat protect" YOUR kids. You are making a selfish choice. If you are going to make a selfish choice to disregard public health advice then at least own it.11 -
Disagree because I'm hardly twisting myself in knots over anything on here.:) I appreciate getting feedback on this subject from some intelligent people, especially getting some different viewpoints from those in other countries and other regions of the U.S. (Maybe, you are are twisting yourself in knots trying to figure out how to get everyone to view the world in the same way you do. Trust me, that's a pointless endeavor! & never will be accomplished with personal attacks. So with that, I'll drop the subject!)I understand what you all are saying. I still think that we should focus on elderly people and working age people first, and observe what happens long term with the vaccines before messing with the kids, the ones without comorbidities that is. If enough adults are vaccinated it will somewhat protect kids and those that are unable to get vaccinated because of health problems.
What you seem to be missing, or are purposely ignoring, is that those who are not vaccinated (including kids) can be vectors for the virus to mutate and evade current vaccines, thereby putting elderly (and everyone else) at risk again.
You are twisting yourself in knots here trying to frame your choice as the ethical one, but it just isn't. You are relying on other people to do the right thing to "somewhat protect" YOUR kids. You are making a selfish choice. If you are going to make a selfish choice to disregard public health advice then at least own it.
6 -
Disagree because I'm hardly twisting myself in knots over anything on here.:) I appreciate getting some feedback on this subject from some intelligent people, especially getting some different viewpoints from those in other countries and other regions of the U.S. (Maybe, you are are twisting yourself in knots trying to figure out how to get everyone to view the world in the same way you do. Trust me, that's a pointless endeavor! & never will be accomplished with personal attacks. So with that, I'll drop the subject!)I understand what you all are saying. I still think that we should focus on elderly people and working age people first, and observe what happens long term with the vaccines before messing with the kids, the ones without comorbidities that is. If enough adults are vaccinated it will somewhat protect kids and those that are unable to get vaccinated because of health problems.
What you seem to be missing, or are purposely ignoring, is that those who are not vaccinated (including kids) can be vectors for the virus to mutate and evade current vaccines, thereby putting elderly (and everyone else) at risk again.
You are twisting yourself in knots here trying to frame your choice as the ethical one, but it just isn't. You are relying on other people to do the right thing to "somewhat protect" YOUR kids. You are making a selfish choice. If you are going to make a selfish choice to disregard public health advice then at least own it.
It's not a personal attack, it is a statement of fact.
You have made a lot of posts here and each one points to the fact that you are choosing to assuage your own anxiety by delaying the vaccine for your kids, which objectively puts the community (and arguably your children) at greater risk. The motive for your choice is protecting your self, not the community, so it is objectively selfish.
Although people do tend to assign negative connotations to it, being selfish isn't inherently wrong.8 -
I think the numbers oyouf kids in the clinical trials were sort of low. Maybe I'm worried more about that than the time frame. I mean I know it has to be tested on someone's kids for us to see any downsides, and all my respect to parents and kids who are brave enough to be the first ones. I'm just not one them!
What numbers do you think were involved in the trials?
The number I saw was 2,000 subjects.0 -
Yes, but weren't half given placebo?
(Okay, that's it for me on this subject!:D)I think the numbers oyouf kids in the clinical trials were sort of low. Maybe I'm worried more about that than the time frame. I mean I know it has to be tested on someone's kids for us to see any downsides, and all my respect to parents and kids who are brave enough to be the first ones. I'm just not one them!
What numbers do you think were involved in the trials?
The number I saw was 2,000 subjects.
0 -
Yes, but weren't half given placebo?
(Okay, that's it for me on this subject!:D)I think the numbers oyouf kids in the clinical trials were sort of low. Maybe I'm worried more about that than the time frame. I mean I know it has to be tested on someone's kids for us to see any downsides, and all my respect to parents and kids who are brave enough to be the first ones. I'm just not one them!
What numbers do you think were involved in the trials?
The number I saw was 2,000 subjects.
You seem locked into a mindset that waiting is a safer option and searching for reasons to justify that course of inaction - but it's not a decision between risk of vaccination versus no risk from inaction. It's actually a balance of two risks.
"Dr June Raine, chief of the the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said: 'We have carefully reviewed clinical trial data in children aged 12 to 15 years and have concluded that the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine is safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits of this vaccine outweigh any risk.'
"Professor Punir Mohammed, chair of the Commission on Human Medicines which conducted the review alongside the MHRA, added: 'We have concluded that based on the data we have seen on the quality, effectiveness and safety of the vaccine, its benefits do outweigh any risk."
Be very clear you are chosing a path that experts think is the higer risk option.8 -
I know I'll get some bask lash for this but maybe ask why get the jab for something that is 99.8x survivable?
Are the side effects or long term effects worth it?
Worldwide there have been 172 million covid-19 cases and 3.7 million deaths, per the JHU dashboard, so I have to ask what disease are you talking about that is 99.8x survivable?5 -
Also, is it ethical for wealthy countries to start vaccinating low risk children, while developing countries need vaccines for their elderly people?
Fortunately, the US bought way more doses than we need for our population and will share 80 million doses with other countries by the end of June.
https://www.npr.org/2021/06/03/1002888711/the-u-s-is-sending-at-least-80-million-surplus-covid-19-vaccines-abroad
..."We know that won't be sufficient," said Jeff Zients, coordinator of the White House COVID-19 response. But he said it's an important step toward boosting global production and trying to end the global pandemic.
"We expect a regular cadence of shipments around the world across the next several weeks. And in the weeks ahead, working with the world's democracies we will coordinate a multilateral effort, including the G-7, to combat and end the pandemic," Zients said.
The U.S. has contracts for hundreds of millions more vaccine doses than it could possibly use — and this is a major move by the Biden administration to attempt to exert global leadership after months of pressure from global health organizations.
Zients said 75% of the first 25 million doses will be allotted through COVAX, an international distribution system aimed at helping vaccinate people in the world's poorest countries.4 -
We should stop talking only about death rate (but there are indirect deaths esp. In counties with worse health care systems so the "real" number is higher.
Organ damage caused by COVID-19
Although COVID-19 is seen as a disease that primarily affects the lungs, it can damage many other organs as well. This organ damage may increase the risk of long-term health problems. Organs that may be affected by COVID-19 include:
We should talk also about this(including children) ...
Heart. Imaging tests taken months after recovery from COVID-19 have shown lasting damage to the heart muscle, even in people who experienced only mild COVID-19 symptoms. This may increase the risk of heart failure or other heart complications in the future.
Lungs. The type of pneumonia often associated with COVID-19 can cause long-standing damage to the tiny air sacs (alveoli) in the lungs. The resulting scar tissue can lead to long-term breathing problems.
Brain. Even in young people, COVID-19 can cause strokes, seizures and Guillain-Barre syndrome — a condition that causes temporary paralysis. COVID-19 may also increase the risk of developing Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease8 -
Pfizer in regional areas of South Australia is now available to everyone from age 16 - 50.
(and AZ for people over 50)
So, includes teens aged 16,17,18, 19
why government has made this so for regional areas only - urban areas only people from 50 up and younger medical/occupational risk groups - I have no idea.
Perhaps because harder to access specialised hospital care if you get the disease in regional area?2 -
Yes, but weren't half given placebo?
(Okay, that's it for me on this subject!:D)I think the numbers oyouf kids in the clinical trials were sort of low. Maybe I'm worried more about that than the time frame. I mean I know it has to be tested on someone's kids for us to see any downsides, and all my respect to parents and kids who are brave enough to be the first ones. I'm just not one them!
What numbers do you think were involved in the trials?
The number I saw was 2,000 subjects.
You seem to not understand how statistical analysis works. You should be looking at whether the numbers used, the way the samples were chosen and the results obtained lead to a statistically significant conclusion. The absolute number of kids will not tell you much.
Spoiler: the numbers above have already been looked at by the relevant health authorities in each country.6 -
Some people do have insurance but their deductible is so high, 3-5k a year that it prevents them from seeking care. For some the monthly payments are 700+ per month. The very poor typically qualify for Medicaid and get everything free. It is those just above that threshold or even lower middle class who have a hard time.
As a side note- so many employers are switching over to high deductible HSA type insurance plans. My husband has a good job, with one of these plans through a good insurance company. I'm getting ready to have out-patient cataract surgery, which is going to set us back around $4,000 out of pocket. We automatically have money put into our HSA account every week, so this will cover most of it, but I can't imagine having these high deductible plans and not have a cushion set aside to help offset it. And after my surgery, our HSA cushion will completely wiped out. Our annual out of pocket max, for our family of 5, is $13,300. If we had a catastrophic incident and reached this, it would be devastating for us financially. And my husband makes more than our state's average income/we're considered upper-middle class in our area.6 -
On being able to afford the vaccine, at least in the U.S.: from the CDC
Who is paying for the vaccine?
The federal government is providing the vaccine free of charge to all people living in the United States, regardless of their immigration or health insurance status.
COVID-19 vaccination providers cannot:
-Charge you for the vaccine
-Charge you directly for any administration fees, copays, or coinsurance
-Deny vaccination to anyone who does not have health insurance coverage, is underinsured, or is out of network
-Charge an office visit or other fee to the recipient if the only service provided is a COVID-19 vaccination
-Require additional services in order for a person to receive a COVID-19 vaccine; however, additional healthcare services can be provided at the same time and billed as appropriate
COVID-19 vaccination providers can:
-Seek appropriate reimbursement from the recipient’s plan or program (e.g., private health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid) for a vaccine administration fee
-However, providers cannot charge the vaccine recipient the balance of the bill
-Seek reimbursement for uninsured vaccine recipients from the Health Resources and Services Administration’s COVID-19 Uninsured Programexternal icon
2 -
Yeah, not sure why the insurance debate around the vaccine when it's 100% free in the U.S.
I would guess that a month stay in hospital would be devastating financially, regardless of how good your insurance may be. Lost wages, just the stress of it, etc.4 -
cmriverside wrote: »Yeah, not sure why the insurance debate around the vaccine when it's 100% free in the U.S.
I would guess that a month stay in hospital would be devastating financially, regardless of how good your insurance may be. Lost wages, just the stress of it, etc.
This was one of our deciding factors in getting the vaccine, we just can't afford extra medical costs due to getting a bad case of covid. We know several people who had hospital stays due to it, their medical bills are insane.3 -
YellowD0gs wrote: »On being able to afford the vaccine, at least in the U.S.: from the CDC
Who is paying for the vaccine?
The federal government is providing the vaccine free of charge to all people living in the United States, regardless of their immigration or health insurance status.
COVID-19 vaccination providers cannot:
-Charge you for the vaccine
-Charge you directly for any administration fees, copays, or coinsurance
-Deny vaccination to anyone who does not have health insurance coverage, is underinsured, or is out of network
-Charge an office visit or other fee to the recipient if the only service provided is a COVID-19 vaccination
-Require additional services in order for a person to receive a COVID-19 vaccine; however, additional healthcare services can be provided at the same time and billed as appropriate
COVID-19 vaccination providers can:
-Seek appropriate reimbursement from the recipient’s plan or program (e.g., private health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid) for a vaccine administration fee
-However, providers cannot charge the vaccine recipient the balance of the bill
-Seek reimbursement for uninsured vaccine recipients from the Health Resources and Services Administration’s COVID-19 Uninsured Programexternal icon
No one said anything about not affording the vaccine.
Heath insurance costs came up because the question was asked...is it ethical for a "wealthy" country to vaccinate low-risk individuals when there are developing nations that can't vaccinate their most vulnerable.
Some of us pointed out that even this "weathly" nation has many people that cannot afford to be sick with Covid, so vaccines should not be diverted away from people here, even if they are low-risk.
We can't afford NOT to get the vaccine.4 -
cmriverside wrote: »Yeah, not sure why the insurance debate around the vaccine when it's 100% free in the U.S.
I would guess that a month stay in hospital would be devastating financially, regardless of how good your insurance may be. Lost wages, just the stress of it, etc.
This was one of our deciding factors in getting the vaccine, we just can't afford extra medical costs due to getting a bad case of covid. We know several people who had hospital stays due to it, their medical bills are insane.
I can't even imagine what a month long hospital stay would cost, especially if one needed a high level of care. I actually feel a bit queasy just thinking about it.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions