Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

> Why are people aged under 50 not to be re-vaccinated?

> The purpose of the vaccination programme is to prevent severe illness, hospitalisation and death. Therefore, people at the highest risk of becoming severely ill will be offered booster vaccination. The purpose of vaccination is not to prevent infection with covid-19, and people aged under 50 are therefore currently not being offered booster vaccination.

> People aged under 50 are generally not at particularly higher risk of becoming severely ill from covid-19. In addition, younger people aged under 50 are well protected against becoming severely ill from covid-19, as a very large number of them have already been vaccinated and have previously been infected with covid-19, and there is consequently good immunity among this part of the population.

> It is important that the population also remembers the guidance on how to prevent the spread of infection, including staying at home in case of illness, frequent aeration or ventilation, social distancing, good coughing etiquette, hand hygiene and cleaning.

It's honestly not economical to keep up the high level of testing and vaccination, not if most don't really get that sick. People are also a lot better at staying home when sick, compared to earlier.

It’s a very good precedent. It wasn’t supposed to be an ongoing thing. The risk benefit just isn’t there except maybe for the most comorbid.

Who will be offered vaccination against covid-19?

People aged 50 years and over will be offered vaccination.

People aged under 50 who are at a higher risk of becoming severely ill from covid-19 will also be offered vaccination against covid-19.

It doesn’t say people under 50 who have had 2 or fewer shots.

The comment you responded to seems to be a partial if not total fabrication.

I don’t see indication of any sort of “roll over eligibility”.

And I don’t think the official recommendation would be 2 shots for everyone since the linked page clearly states it is no longer offered for under 18s, and Søren Brostrøm, director of the health authority, saying it was a mistake to give it to any under 18s, and if you read between the lines and look at the data it was probably a mistake to give it to any under 50s.

"Denmark no longer offering second Covid booster shot..." suggest that Denmark have at one point offered the second booster to below-50 and have now stopped.

This is not the case.

Until now, the second booster have only been offered to a smaller group of very old or very vulnerable individuals. Now Denmark is rolling out larger scale vaccinations, offering the second booster to everyone over 50.

> assuming your comment is accurate—I haven't dug through the article

The article is somewhat unclear since it just assumes everyone already has the three jabs. The "autumn vaccination programme" is the second booster. A better source to the official policy is the page in Danish:

https://www.sst.dk/da/corona/Vaccination

Google translate to English: https://www-sst-dk.translate.goog/da/corona/Vaccination?_x_t...

Key quote:

> 10. Do you still recommend that one take the 1st, 2nd and 3rd shots against covid-19 if one has not yet been vaccinated?

> The Danish Health Authority continues to recommend that persons who have not been vaccinated be vaccinated with the 1st and 2nd shots. This also applies even if they are younger than 50, as there may be a certain risk of serious illness if you are not vaccinated.

> What is compelling you to spread misinformation?

My source is https://www.sst.dk/da/corona/Vaccination point 10

Case numbers and deaths seem to be plateauing at a pretty low rate, especially considering the relaxed restrictions these numbers are occurring under. It seems reasonable to think that we won't suddenly see a more dangerous strain of this particular virus, or that vaccines will lose a significant amount of effectiveness.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

It still (just barely) shows part of the 2018 influenza spike, which is pretty similar to where we were at in July (note that the last few weeks on this chart are likely to come up a bit, but from what I've seen they don't rise much once they're 2-3 weeks old).

Now it's always possible that the winter will be just like 2020/21 and 2021/22 winters, in terms of deaths, but I highly doubt it. Anyone who has not either been infected or vaccinated (or both) by now, is almost certainly naturally resistant. There isn't much of an "immunologically naive" population left.

Where we are now is analogous to influenza in 1920, just after the big flupandemic of 1918/19.

Look up how many deaths occurred in the 2-year 1918-1919 period.

We know it isn't accurate because we know that large numbers were merely covid positive when they died (often using an inaccurate testing method)

Providing perverse funding incentives to hospitals distorts the data

Also, seatbelts are removable which people would say makes that comparison irrelevant.

That's weird.

It is not real insofar one assumes COVID is special or particularly more dangerous in this regard. It isn’t, except for temporary loss of smell and reduced aerobic capacity.

Also see https://kirkegaard.substack.com/p/how-unreal-is-long-covid

The only difference is that Covid caused the number of viral infections to skyrocket, and with that, we see a corresponding jump in the occurrence of post-viral autoimmune disregulation, so now there's more effort being spent on finding out what's really going on.

It's not like it was ever ok that the flu killed tens of thousands of people every year in the US alone. It's just not a thing that is going to be going away, so the tradeoff of temporarily staying home or wearing masks or etc. is different than if you think it will be gone in a few months.

> Vaccination is offered to all children from 12 years of age since COVID-19 can cause serious illness also in children. The vaccine used in Sweden, Comirnaty, is approved for use from 12 years of age. It provides a high level of protection against serious illness.

> Several EU countries are vaccinating children aged 12–15 years, including Denmark, Finland and Norway. So far, almost 20 million children worldwide have received vaccines. This means that the knowledge on vaccination of children against COVID-19 is much greater today.

We call it science the process/method, rather than science the religion.

> The hosts and guests both openly and candidly talk about some of the disagreements they have with the prevailing public health guidelines while at the same time give so much detail and depth into virology and immunology so as to show how full of shit the big anti-vax misinformation peddlers are.

I'll keep that in mind next time I am censored.

> So many anti-vaxxers say you can't have any disagreements with the party line or you get cancelled and then these prominent experts at the top of their fields do it every week on TWiV and don't get cancelled (because they aren't full of shit).

Profanity aside, it sounds like you are touting controlled opposition, or, Establishment figures critiquing establishment positions.

True experts' doubts just reinforce their positions instead of weakening them, IMO.

For the record, I have got 3 shots (2 Pfizer + 1 Moderna), and I don't regret it. But I respect people who chose differently because the unknowns about the vaccines.

What about the people who were silenced about their negative vaccine reactions...[1]

orjournalists like Alex Berenson that were banned from twitter from talking about the data? The first journalist to win against twitter in court and get unbanned, ever [2]

[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-vaccine-side...

[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/08/alex-...

On the one hand you say anti-vaxers are not cancelled but on the other hand you refer to them as full of shit. In spite of so many of their claims about the vaccine having been proven correct: it doesn't prevent transmission, it doesn't prevent severe covid or death, and for some age groups the risks outweigh the benefits: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4206070.

You know the only people more full of shit than the anti-vaxxers? The "trust the science" shills. The anti-vaxxers may have the wrong idea but from 2020 to...well about the last few months we saw that anyone who even remotely questioned the efficacy of vaccines was "anti-science" and a "science denier". Major platforms spent millions (billions?) to kill as much of this as they could despite the fact the "fact checkers" had no idea either. Fact checkers by-and-large are editorial writers on a power trip. I don't think anyone whose been awake at the wheel for the last 4 years is surprised at this. But they gained an entirely new level of unjustified power in 2020.

A few years later all of the sudden some of the "conspiracies" were at least shown to have some veracity: the vaccines aren't nearly as effective as advertised, the studies were rushed/manipulated, boosters are not effective, the lab leak hypothesis, etc.

Now, a real "science believer" would simply change their view at this point to match the reality of the situation. We spent two years pretending we have a full view of exactly what COVID is, what caused it, where it started, etc. The truth is we have no idea. The best scientists so far can't even agree on if a booster works or not (and by works I mean is effective along a wide population of varying demographics). People are seemingly religious bound to the "wear your mask, trust the science" non-sense. If anything, these people are just as bad as the people saying the vaccine is carrying nano-robots.

If you recall, in 2020 especially, the idea that the virus originated in the BSL lab in Wuhan was put into several papers. None of which can be found anymore (at least I cannot find them). These scientists were "canceled" immediately.

There's a lot of nonsense coming out of both sides. But to pretend it's simply "those pesky anti-vaxxers" as if none of them can rub a collective two brain cells together is frankly funny. I have a feeling the Pfizer documents once fully released and analyzed will be a treasure trove of hindenberg level disasters once the religious party-line fervor comes to an end.

So not being in the population at risk I have no intention to take a booster. Am I an anti-vaxer? I certainly disagree with public health policy in most countries.

Now whole governments are admitting that people under 50 don't really need those vaccines after all. We now have studies claiming that serious vaccination side effects are more likely than serious covid sickness in young men.

The anti vaxxers were proven RIGHT by this in many of their claims. How should they EVER trust governments again? How should they ever leave their anti-vax echochambers again? It was shown time and time again that governments and their high profile rockstar twitter "experts" get the facts right as many times as a broken clock the time, sometimes even spreading deliberate misinformation/lies ("Faucis noble lies") and absolutely can not be trusted.

My government as well scammed me into getting a second vaccine, after the retracted their claim that the single shot J&J vaccination would suffice.

I am not even an anti vaxxer -I am happy my parents are vaccinated. They always were at an at-risk age, but I am not and I am not interested in getting another covid vaccine. I remain terrified at the prospect of a reinstatement of the green pass system.

The overlap is not exact, that's why I say use a venn diagram but essentially anything anti-establishment has a anti-vaxxer component since vaccinse are considered establishments' game.

I just don't see how you came to that conclusion. They aren't remotely similar viruses, they aren't the same vaccines, yet you confidently declare that if X is true for the influenza vaccine, it must also be true for the coronavirus vaccine? How come?

Let me stop you right there. I'm not sure why you think he thinks Covid boosters not matched to the current variant will have bigger efficacy, or the comment doesn't display correctly on my screen.

That's a disingenuous reading of the thing you just quoted.

It's 40% to 60% if well matched - assuming that that the range is evenly distributed then the middle point is 50% not 40% and reducing overall risk of flu by 50% is a good thing since flu is much more a killer of the old and young (usually - there have been exceptions, 1918 Flu (aka Spanish Flu) killed younger people at a much higher rate).

My understanding (again, I might be mistaken) is they the correct headline should be "Denmark to focus booster campaign on at-risk people".

(Which is much less clikbaity, I guess ;) ?)

It's annoying that vaccination is only ever recommended or forbidden.

One should understand that in many countries with large public healthcare there is a big difference between who’s part of the vaccination campaigns and who’s actually allowed to get it, but not targeted by a campaign. I read this as the campaigns this fall focusing on boosting the over 50 and healthy under 50 need to get it themselves (be it first or subsequent shots).

To think, I actually tried sleeping in a bulky P100 mask because the pandemic pr0n was crazy.

Just as crazy as me trying to sleep in a P100, which, I admit, was pretty crazy.

Given that, reducing the severity of the illness is arguably counterproductive, as it reduces the odds that the person will go out and about as opposed to staying at home away from others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Week_in_Virology

https://youtu.be/hwPhF7v4G4M?t=1240

https://youtu.be/jbPlhaHytm0?t=2449

For me personally, the flu vaccine usually means a few days of feeling lousy in return for maybe not getting the flu that I don't know if I've ever had to compare (flu testing has never been something I could access). Otoh, a couple incidents of maybe flu and smaller reactions to the flu shot over many administrations make me intend to get it every year.

Testing positive for COVID this summer was icky and disruptive, I'm going to get the new booster and hope it helps, cause I don't want that again.

Yes, it has. Although the people haven't changed, the information has, and the most stubborn of people are still defending their initial thesis without any ability to re-examine their priors if they were wrong and actually doing very messed up things to their fellow citizens. They are dug in; because to do otherwise would be having to face guilt.

However, I want to point out that HN was really good in the beginning. I knew about the pandemic earlier than any of my colleagues and gave some advice about cancelling events that sounded ominous then but turned out to be excellent. I even was able to predict the case numbers reliably during the exponential growth phase in early 2020, using my own calculations. All of that thanks to HN. Early discussions from January to April 2020 on HN were quite insightful, as were later discussions of possible medications and therapies by some of the rich hypochondriacs on HN.

I agree that HN is now useless for Covid-related discussions and has mostly turned into unscientific antivax garbage. But it was very useful during the beginning of the pandemic.

My reply, which got flagged for some reason:

Adversaries of the west want us to be unvaccinated and sick. Knowing what we know about "troll farms", I would not be surprised if there is an effort by some states to discredit the vaccine on English speaking forums.

I'll add more to make it more clear I wasn't talking only about anti-vaccine: These troll farms play both sides. They want discussion forums to be toxic.

Which suggests to me that that you knew what you were doing when you posted it with that title. It seems somewhat intended to spark incendiary comments and disagreement. So I think it's pretty reasonable for the commenter to be suspicious of you. If you want your first article to go better, next time post about something less controversial, or with a more accurate title.

While serving in the military got loaded up with all number of vaccines. If you serve, with an area of operations including Africa, you will get lots of shorts..

But now, I seriously do not trust the public health authorities.

I would prefer not to have to read 500 medical studies like I have done with covid with pros and cons on everything, and return to a pre-pandemic position of trust in public health authorities. But I think I cannot because they have proven themselves to be corrupt, politicized arbiters with an angle.

This is really a crummy situation.