JCVI Remains Opposed to Vaccination of Younger Teenagers

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) may have changed its mind on the vaccination of healthy 16 and 17 year-olds but reports suggest that it remains largely opposed to the vaccination of non-clinically vulnerable younger teenagers and children. The Guardian has the story.

Several members of the JCVI said the mainstream sentiment on the body is still extremely cautious about expanding the programme to 12 to 15 year-olds, even though a Deputy Chief Medical Officer has suggested that outcome is high [sic] probable and politicians have said they would like the issue to remain under review.

The JCVI recommended on Wednesday that all over-16s be offered jabs, just two weeks after saying children should not routinely be given Covid vaccinations. The U-turn provoked alarm at what was described as a “shambolic” vaccine roll-out for older teenagers, with doctors saying they were being “left in the dark” about the details of the roll-out to younger people.

The JCVI has moved to “refresh” the membership of its Covid subcommittee in recent weeks, with one prominent critic of Covid jabs for children, Professor Robert Dingwall, leaving the body.

Dingwall and others on the committee said his views were not the reason for the shake-up, and that sentiment on the body is still that the risks outweigh the benefits for 12 to 15 year-olds. …

Jonathan Van-Tam, a Deputy Chief Medical Officer, has said it was “more likely than less likely” that the list of eligible children would be broadened.

However, one expert who remains a member of the JCVI said the overriding opinion of the body was still against expanding vaccinations to 12 to 15 year-olds and argued that the committee was more likely to recommend removing categories of vulnerable children who are currently offered vaccines.

Committee members said they had not felt political pressure to change their views when it came to changing its advice on 16 and 17 year-olds. However, two members on the committee said there had been a fear that Scotland could go its own way on vaccinating older teenagers, even though the Scottish First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has consistently said her Government will follow JCVI advice.

Worth reading in full.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

41 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
steve_z
4 years ago

the risks outweigh the benefits for 12 to 15 year-olds”

what risks? Devi Sridhar said the vaccines were ‘100% safe’ for children

Lockdown Sceptic
4 years ago
Reply to  steve_z

How long for? they keep saying it’s safe and effective.

Safe and effective, then and now
https://odysee.com/@ThePlandemic:d/Safe-and-Effective-Then-and-Now:9?

Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow anti lockdown freedom lovers, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.

Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell

Peter W
Peter W
4 years ago
Reply to  steve_z

Must be correct if she says so. After all she’s so well qualified to comment – in fact as qualified as I am, an armchair expert.

Occams Pangolin Pie
4 years ago
Reply to  steve_z

Yes.
Devi Sridhar wouldn’t know. She is a rent a gob social scientist seemingly willing to say almost anything to promote any agenda.

steve_z
4 years ago

The JCVI has moved to “refresh” the membership of its Covid subcommittee in recent weeks, with one prominent critic of Covid jabs for children, Professor Robert Dingwall, leaving the body.”

you can get whatever answer you want if you choose the right ‘advisors’

CGL
CGL
4 years ago
Reply to  steve_z

And when you get rid of the ones who disagree with you

CGL
CGL
4 years ago

Until next week

dante
4 years ago
Reply to  CGL

Exactly.

A Y M
4 years ago

Oh ffs. This is same ploy they used with under 50s, then 40s then 30’s then 20s then over 18s, then 16 and 17s, and pregnant women somewhere in between.
Eventually they get convinced it’s worth it.
At some point it will be newborns.
This is becoming so predictable.

steve_z
4 years ago
Reply to  A Y M

I remember in 2020 ‘dont wait for a vaccine – they take years of testing etc’
then – vulnerable only’
then ‘over 50s’

etc

pity I haven’t got time to find the old BBC news headlines that reflect the change in thinking

Manjushri
Manjushri
4 years ago
Reply to  A Y M

Blackmailer: ‘Do what you’re told, otherwise the kid gets it’ 💉

Peter W
Peter W
4 years ago
Reply to  A Y M

Why wait until birth?

chris c
chris c
4 years ago
Reply to  Peter W

Well they’re sticking pregnant women.

C S
C S
4 years ago

The risks outweigh the benefits until they can find new members of JCVI willing to sell themselves to “change their view”

RW
RW
4 years ago

This should read: Despite massive political pressure from the behavioural scientists and associated advocates of alternative medicine, the JCVI is not yet convinced that it’ll be able to get away with this, too and/ or members have relatives with children they really don’t want to try this on.

Lockdown Sceptic
4 years ago

How long for? they keep saying it’s safe and effective.

Safe and effective, then and now
https://odysee.com/@ThePlandemic:d/Safe-and-Effective-Then-and-Now:9?

Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow anti lockdown freedom lovers, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.

Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell

Julian
4 years ago

They are almost certainly lying through their teeth. I’m afraid my default assumption now about anything covid-related from any politician or other person on an official body is that it is a big fat lie, until proven otherwise.

sophie123
4 years ago
Reply to  Julian

snap. It’s become completely predictable.

iane
iane
4 years ago
Reply to  sophie123

Well, not really: just think of the worst possible response to any situation.

KidFury
KidFury
4 years ago

They said the same thing a few weeks back. It was a bone then and this is a bone. They will change their minds by end of the month IMO

Manjushri
Manjushri
4 years ago

Is parental consent required for under 16s to be injected with an unapproved experimental medical intervention?
It’s not required in full on fascist Canada, although ironically parental consent is required for any school trips.

Mr Taxpayer
Mr Taxpayer
4 years ago
Reply to  Manjushri

So children can choose to be experimented on with a gene therapy, but can’t choose to buy tobacco, alcohol, firearms, automobiles or to vote.

ellie-em
4 years ago
Reply to  Manjushri

According to WHO, the fact a child / younger person attends school when a vax programme is scheduled implies there has been parental consent.

https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/policies_strategies/consent_note_en.pdf

Peter W
Peter W
4 years ago
Reply to  ellie-em

So no need for consent for school trips as it’s already implied that there is parental consent.

ellie-em
4 years ago
Reply to  Peter W

I don’t know about school trips but WHO have wangled it that somehow, being on the school premises when vax are being done can be viewed as implied consent. Probably best to keep children off school on the planned vax days but that won’t help if a ‘pop -up’ suddenly appears – with free ice creams etc – that parents aren’t aware of.
Very worrying. I don’t underestimate how low the government will go in their fiendish ways.

iane
iane
4 years ago

Ah well, now we know – it is just days away!

RTSC
RTSC
4 years ago

Waiting to see how many 16/17 yr olds “coincidentally” die or are severely affected following one of these unlicensed, poorly tested and still undergoing Stage 3 Trials …. before they push them onto younger teenagers?

amanuensis
4 years ago

No benefits, only risks.

William Gruff
William Gruff
4 years ago

What I find really shocking is that people do not seem to realise that what is put into their bodies and those of their children is not subject to the bought and paid for whim of a bureaucrat, a politician or a corporate drone. Whether or not the government, or any other body, decides that any person can take a medicine is irrelevant; the decision is the individual’s and not some third party’s.

monica coyle
monica coyle
4 years ago

Laurence Fox of the Reform Party UK (he with the rather lovely mellifluous voice) says if you come after my children with the jab, I will come after you with a shovel. Here he is in an interview with Alex Jones (he with the not so lovely and definitely not mellifluous voice)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Q3o4IMAH9pss/ About 50 minutes in.

Trabant
4 years ago

https://hackntrace.xyz/
Try this app
You can add it to your phone home screen

Spritof_GFawkes
4 years ago
Reply to  Trabant

Hooray, its back!

SweetBabyCheeses
4 years ago

Why don’t you just say you don’t have a smart phone?

Mr Taxpayer
Mr Taxpayer
4 years ago

I have an old Nokia I carry for exactly this reason.

Peter W
Peter W
4 years ago
Reply to  Mr Taxpayer

I have 3 old bricks! I can even make phone calls and do texting on them! Amazing technology and so simple.

Mr Taxpayer
Mr Taxpayer
4 years ago

Dig out your old Nokia. Take that with you to the holiday park. I have one, it works wonders when you show it to the beleagured staff.
“Can you order on the app?”
“If you can order on the app on this, miss, I’ll leave you a hundred quid tip. So how about you bring a notepad and pen and take our order.”

ellie-em
4 years ago

The gov.uk recently updated – 02/08/21 – regulatory approval for Pfizer which now includes ages 12 years and older.

It’s a done deal.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-pfizer-biontech-vaccine-for-covid-19/summary-of-product-characteristics-for-covid-19-vaccine-pfizerbiontech

ellie-em
4 years ago

Recently updated – 02/08/21 regulatory approval of Pfizer – patient information leaflets.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-pfizer-biontech-vaccine-for-covid-19/patient-information-leaflet-for-covid-19-vaccine-pfizerbiontech

Note:

“5. Possible side effects
Like all vaccines, Comirnaty can cause side effects, although not everybody gets them.

Very common side effects: may affect more than 1 in 10 people

injection site: pain, swelling
tiredness
headache
muscle pain
chills
joint pain
diarrhoea
fever
Some of these side effects were slightly more frequent in adolescents 12 to 15 years than in adults.“

186NO
186NO
4 years ago

FFS why would you risk your sanity, even in “non SARS COV 2” times , by attending any “entertainment” in a “national holiday park”?

Occams Pangolin Pie
4 years ago

I can’t decide which organisation is most untrustworthy and corrupt.
SAGE
JCVI
MHRA
Answers on an unsanitised postcard to No 10 Downing St.

I suppose the MHRA for approving this stuff but then again…

Newman20
Newman20
4 years ago

Perhaps one of these so-called experts would explain why a 16 year old is more at risk from this virus than a 15 year old. I wasn’t aware that viruses were able to calculate the age of those it infects.