This is only true if you consider death the only "serious" outcome. Around 25% of children and adolescents who get COVID-19 will get "long COVID", with long-term effects we've just begun to understand. Plenty of "young-ish healthy people" have suffered debilitating effects.
At this efficiency level they’re not an adequate preventive measure.
That's a much bigger deal than whether you have 12 in a million or 24 in a million chance of something that has a 5% chance of being fatal.
Giving a population lead poisoning didn't kill any of them outright but cognitive problems in the lead generation is correlated to our higher homicide rates and many of the poorer outcomes in our generation and echo's of its affects in society.
I find it interesting that the wider anti-vax demographics overlap heavily with the safety/helicopter parenting that focuses on some extremely unlikely demise as a reason to limit the next generation in ways that will have much higher rates of earlier deaths and reduced lifestyles when considering their overall lifespan.
Anyway, the children’s vaccine was authorized in the EU on the 19th of October 2022, after all Omicron strains were making rounds through the population.
In Germany at first one dose was recommended for 12-17 then one plus booster. Kids younger than 12 may be vaccinated on a case by case basis if there’s risk factors or the parent explicitly wants it. This means that the risk of Long Covid in this age range is not a “bigger deal” than the benefits and risk from the vaccine.
According to the RKI, there were 1500 vaccinated in the age range 0-4. And between <10% and 30% in the range 5-12 depending on state.
In conclusion, your dogmatic approach is not supported by the competent health organizations. Neither is it supported by parents.
> your dogmatic approach is not ... supported by parents
Your dogma here is that you assume all parents take the zero-sum "ok for thine but not for mine" approach. Personally I know plenty of parents who were eager to vaccinate their kids against COVID. But I'm not taking my personal outlook as some kind of fact about all parents.
Instead I will note that in the history of vaccine mandates there has always been opposition from a _minority_ of parents, doctors what have you in the context of broad societal support, even though vaccines have always had some amount of risk that similarly to COVID were vastly outweighed by the societal benefit and the risks of the disease itself.
Allow me to expand on that: the parents which didn’t vaccinate their children (<12) are the ones who are in agreement with “the science” and they are the majority. I’ve provided numbers for Germany from the appropriate health organizations.
The parents that vaccinated their healthy kids are the ones that decided based on feelings or were influenced and manipulated by vaccine activists.
The risk to society must be handled by the society, not kids. Adults are welcome to wear masks or get the vaccine themselves. Or they can choose to die free, choking on their own mucus like a boss.
The risk of the disease is obviously not that great to kids (<12) according to the vaccine commission. Almost looks like adults are trying to force kids into a treatment so that said adults benefit.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2022/...
Incidence and seriousness of myocarditis (ISM) naturally / in absence of covid or vaccine, ISM following vaccine, ISM following Covid, ISM after being vaccinated but later catching Covid, relative risk of death / or the other litany of problems following unvaccinated covid infection, same but with vaccinated covid infection and the increased chances of avoiding infection after being vaccinated.
It's possible that vaccines are leading to more myocarditis, covid is certainly leading to more myocarditis, most cases of myocarditis are undetected and resolve on their own with no health impact at all.. as expected, weird antivaxxers are harping on point 1 to the detriment of anyone actually interested in public health.
[0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/figures/mm6915e3-F1.g... -- from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm
I just looked. The Vaccine doesn't lower your risk of getting myocarditis if you still become infected by COVID.
During the past 60 days for people 18-49 (the cohort sizes are suspect) COVID cases per 100,000 were as follows:
Not fully vaxxed: 98.0
Fully vaxxed: 70.3
Boosted: 92.8
For 49-64 (again with the cohort sizing) per 100,000 cases are:
Not fully vaxxed: 90.0
Fully vaxxed: 86.7
Boosted: 96.7
Over 65 cases: Not fully vaxxed: 390.05
Fully vaxxed: 284.2
Boosted: 161.7
So if you're young and healthy if you're boosted, you're hardly getting any protection.
If you're middle aged, it doesn't look like you're getting any protection from getting infected and if you're boosted, you may be increasing your risk.
If you're old and vulnerable, you should absolutely take the vaccine.
Nationally people 12+ who were vaccinated were 3.2x less likely to test positive for covid in October 2022. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-s.... (The protection against serious illness and death is obviously much stronger.)
The CDC summarizes and caveats the data as follows (note particularly the last point):
- All vaccinated groups had overall lower risk of dying from COVID-19 and testing positive for COVID-19 compared with people who were unvaccinated.
- Based on early surveillance data, people who were vaccinated with an updated (bivalent) booster dose had lower rates of dying from COVID-19 and slightly lower rates of testing positive for COVID-19 compared with people who were vaccinated but had not received an updated booster dose.
- Age-standardized rates of cases and deaths by vaccination status and receipt of the updated (bivalent) booster dose do not account for other factors like the higher prevalence of previous infection among the unvaccinated and un-boosted groups; waning protection related to time since vaccination; and testing practices (such as use of at-home tests), underlying conditions, and prevention behaviors which likely differ by age and vaccination status. Additionally, any data recording errors that misclassify monovalent and updated (bivalent) boosters at the time of vaccine administration would make rates between the two groups appear more similar.
As for 60 days, that seems fair as that's likely to capture the prevalence of the most recent variants and not delta, which we know the vaccine worked well against...
So, looking at your source for the last 60 days, if you're in the 18-49 range your likelihood of getting Covid is about 2x if you're not vaxed and 2.2x if your not boosted.