COVID vax? in kids
Let's look at a study
Just saw this so thought I would share, make a few comments and ask for yours.
Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, piae121, https://doi.org/10.1093/jpids/piae121
Published:
05 December 2024
Here was their abstract:
Abstract
To understand how COVID-19 vaccines impact infection risk in children <5 years, we assessed risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from Sept 2022–April 2023 in three cohort studies. There was no difference in risk by vaccination status. While vaccines reduce severe disease, they may not reduce SARS-CoV-2 infections in young children.
Here was their Conclusion:
Conclusion
Despite the limitations, data from this community cohort of young children with any SARS-CoV-2 infections and symptomatic COVID-19 disease contribute to understanding protection from vaccination and prior infection. COVID-19 vaccines are recommended to reduce severe illness; overall risk of infection may not differ substantially between vaccinated and unvaccinated children <5 years.
Let’s unpack and dissect this a bit, using some Common Sense Health and Wellness
The study was done in 2022-2023. This was when the Omicron variants were spreading. While more contagious, the Omicron variants appear to make people less ill at the time of infection. We do not know from this study or others yet whether Omicron causes longer term symptoms or issues.
There was no difference in risk by vaccination status.
This means no difference in catching COVID whether or not you had a COVID mrna injection.
Participants with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were less likely to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 and experience symptomatic COVID-19 compared with those who had no evidence of prior infection. This was true regardless of timing of prior infection. In addition, those with prior infection and who were vaccinated, were less likely to be infected including those vaccinated ≥60 days prior, than those who were unvaccinated and naïve.
This means in these kids, having a prior COVID infection protected from a further COVID infection. This is called Natural Immunity, and is how the immune system is supposed to work. Having a COVID mrna injection AFTER a natural infection also showed lower risk, but it is difficult to know whether that is from the previous natural immunity from past infection or from the COVID mrna injection. So they kind of conflated or muddled that part, on purpose???
There was no difference in risk of infection or symptomatic COVID-19 by vaccination status alone, regardless of timing of vaccination or manufacturer type. However, naïve participants vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech were more likely to be infected and experience symptomatic COVID-19 compared to naïve and unvaccinated participants , whereas participants with evidence of prior infection and who were vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech were less likely to be infected.
Children who did not have COVID were more likely to get COVID if they WERE COVID mrna injected. Yes you read that right. Getting a COVID mrna injection made you more likely to get COVID.
COVID-19 vaccines are recommended to reduce severe illness; overall risk of infection may not differ substantially between vaccinated and unvaccinated children <5 years.
They did not study the severe illness but I believe took that from other studies. So not sure why they mentioned that here.
But wait, there is more.
There is always more to a study.
I always look for bias. Best way to look for “potential” bias is to see who FUNDED the study. In the real world, funders of studies are looking for certain results, so study rules are often set up to allow the best way to get the results they want. Luckily this is not always the case, but when big Pharma or Big Government is involved, you need to read with eyes wide open.
So who funded and designed the study?
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The CDC collaborated with partner sites to design and conduct the study; managed, analyzed, and interpreted the data; prepared, reviewed, and approved the manuscript; and had a role in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Next let us look to see if there are any conflict of interests with people, persons, things or industries involved in the study. These must all be listed for a study. It is best to have the words, “No Conflict of Interests” in this section. Let’s see what was in this study.
Potential conflicts of interest:
HC: Abbvie (Advisor/Consultant), Ellume (Advisor/Consultant, Grant/Research Support), Merck (Advisor/Consultant), Pfizer (Advisor/Consultant), Vir(Advisor/Consultant); JE: Ark Biopharma (Advisor/Consultant), AstraZeneca (Advisor/Consultant, Grant/Research Support), GlaxoSmithKline (Grant/Research Support), Meissa Vaccines (Advisor/Consultant), Merck (Grant/Research Support), Moderna (Advisor/Consultant, Grant/Research Support), Pfizer (Advisor/Consultant, Grant/Research Support), Sanofi Pasteur (Advisor/Consultant); EM: Merck (Grant/Research Support); AM: Roche (Advisor/Consultant, Honoraria); LO: Study participant in CASCADIA.
As someone who over the years has read quite a few medical studies, this is quite a large list of Big Pharma and Big Health industry that could make plenty of $$ from COVID.
Sooo, my Common Sense Health and Wellness take on this.
Natural immunity seems to be just as good without the potential short and long term risks from an mrna injection where we don’t have enough long term data to prove safety and efficacy. The risks of severe disease in children is so so small, that even if an mrna injection may slightly reduce chance of severe disease, is the unknown potential long term risks from the mrna injection worthwhile in children? I don’t think we will have those answers for another decade, as we watch the younger generation age.
Sooooo, if we have this data, as well as the conflicts of interest between a CDC who appeared to be in collusion with Big Pharma to get everyone mrna injected, should these mrna injections ever have been coerced, threatened, peer pressured or mandated?
I’ll let you debate this in the comments below, if you so choose.
There needs to be a positive benefit-risk assessment for any medical product/procedure. The benefit must outweigh the risk. What is the possible benefit in administering these non-immunising marginally therapeutic injections to a general juvenile population that is not at risk?
Also, just a friendly reminder, but the term "natural immunity" was censored by social media/tech in 2021. The basic concept was also denied on MSM by supposed doctors/scientists.
Lest we forget......
We need to realize there is no free lunch. We need public funds to pay for the CDC, scientific journals and even AAP recommendation panels. When we go cheap and allow industry to foot the bill they are going to extract a cost. Then not only won’t we maximize health, we won’t actually save money.
A reason it’s important for industry to get the childhood vaccination mandated is not just the increased sales, but liability. Once the Emergency Use Authorization for COVID vaccination ends so does liability protection. But if they get the mandate for kids, all vaccines liability even for adults is removed and compensated goes through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-153406671