Thread by @dgurdasani1

Dr. Lin at the JCVI outlining update of advice now in a briefing. They seem to be considering mostly direct benefits on children, and 'impacts of vaccine or other childhood vaccination programmes' like meningitis vaccination.Wish he would extrapolate- is this a capacity issue?🧵

Dr. Lin says it is rare for severe outcomes to occur. He talks about long COVID - saying this only occurs in 'a very small proportion' of long COVID. Wonder what data he bases this on, given the most unbiased and representative data suggest 8% incidence of symptoms for 12 wks.

He says vaccine benefits are greater for 'older children than younger children'. Is he referring to 16-17 yr olds vs 12-15 yr olds? Is he going to articulate what this difference is, and why vaccines aren't been extended to 12+

He is saying they are seeing several children in hospital with severe covid, requiring oxygen and ventilation.

So they're now saying 16-17 yr olds going to be offered just one dose at the moment pending updates.

They're not advising on 2nd doses at the moment suggesting there isn't enough data - possibly on dosing intervals? Unclear what data they're waiting for. >7 mil adolescents have been fully vaccinated in the US.

For 12-15 yr olds, vaccines still only offered to children with v. limited specific conditions (so not the much wider group of 16-17 yr olds and adults who were prioritised). Very unclear what evidence any of this is based on.

Now being asked why the sudden change given data has been the same for some time. They're suggesting this is based on data on myocarditis- makes no sense given they announced on 19th July, when >7 million had been vaccinated in the US alone & myocarditis risk was well understood.

He suggests it's 'more data on the summer wave'. Not sure how this would justify delaying, given infection rates were even higher at the time the decision was made. Looks like this will start in 'a very short number of weeks'. Saying supply is not a problem.

Being asked why they missed the opportunity given the very sick children being seen in hospitals and ICUs - also for 12-15 yr olds. Dr. Lin again saying only those with specific underlying conditions will be offered.

Saying the 'vast majority' of those who become unwell have underlying conditions. Where's this data? What about long COVID. This affects a lot of health children? Protecting 'the majority' who become unwell isn't sufficient, when children are being exposed to high infection risks

It seems that long COVID hasn't been considered here - do we know what proportion of long COVID is among those with these conditions? Because the data from adults certainly suggests that this is common even among those with no pre-existing conditions.

Dr. Lin talking about 'fuzziness of data' and 'certainty of separation of dots' when being asked on whether the data has changed. No clear answer- if there is greater certainty, what is this based on, given data on millions of vaccinated adolescents has been available for months?

Being asked to 'put numbers on the dots', given their advice 2 weeks ago said benefits did not clearly outweigh risks. Dr Lin again talking about 'being as sure as possible for safety'. He talks about being 'cautionary' and 'placing high value on safety of children.

I honestly find this argument bizarre, given the JCVI strategy is anything but cautionary. At a point in time when infection risk has been 1%/wk in this age group they essentially made a decision that risk of infection was less than risk of vaccination. How is that cautionary?

Dr. Lin says he is 'reluctant to put a number on it', given it's complex. That's odd - because the way we make decisions is by quantitatively weighing risks and benefits. We did this here just like the CDC did.
Their response is completely inadequate.
osf.io/grzma

JVT now defending JCVI saying that we should not 'move faster than science'. No danger of that happening, given we're always behind on evidence & science. It's clear the evidence hasn't changed, and we've allowed thousands of adolescents to get infected over the past weeks.

Many of these have developed long COVID, and some have been hospitalised when they could've been vaccinated. Going slow on vaccinating children when vaccines found to be safe & effective in millions is anything but 'cautionary' and 'safe'.