Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 90% of kids 5-11 in these schools have been vaccinated over the next few weeks here are going to be the choices presented:

1. Mandate vaccines and potentially replace 10% of this age group. Given the waitlists to get into these schools, I doubt it will be a problem.
2. Run the school like the students all aren't vaccinated and cater to 10% of the school population.
3. Separate the kids who aren't vaccinated into their own classes with different protocols as restrictions ease.

All of the Upper Schools had the same choices and what did they do?...

Why? For parents who chose not to vaccinate, they should feel ok with their kids going to school with less protocols. Why should the school have to separate? We don't have separate super markets for vaccinated vs unvaccinated people. Our kids will be protected from the already slim chance of any health issues from Covid. I don't see these 'choices' as valid.

Why should it be ok for your unvaccinated kid to become a vector in the school when everyone else is acting responsibly. Or do you still not understand how viruses and vaccines work?

It appears you are struggling with that as well. These “vaccines” aren’t really vaccines in the traditional sense. They don’t prevent people from getting sick, or spreading it, apparently. Thus, even a vaccinated kid could be a “vector” to use your terminology.

*Significantly reduces* likelihood of catching, spreading, and experiencing severe illness or death.

Which is the “traditional” desired effect of vaccines.

The vaccines aren’t really vaccines is a NWNJ talking point. I suggest you don’t engage.

You are labeling and shutting off the discussion and pretending that info is not real. Very mature! Respond to it with info if you can but don’t engage in belittling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 90% of kids 5-11 in these schools have been vaccinated over the next few weeks here are going to be the choices presented:

1. Mandate vaccines and potentially replace 10% of this age group. Given the waitlists to get into these schools, I doubt it will be a problem.
2. Run the school like the students all aren't vaccinated and cater to 10% of the school population.
3. Separate the kids who aren't vaccinated into their own classes with different protocols as restrictions ease.

All of the Upper Schools had the same choices and what did they do?...

Why? For parents who chose not to vaccinate, they should feel ok with their kids going to school with less protocols. Why should the school have to separate? We don't have separate super markets for vaccinated vs unvaccinated people. Our kids will be protected from the already slim chance of any health issues from Covid. I don't see these 'choices' as valid.

Why should it be ok for your unvaccinated kid to become a vector in the school when everyone else is acting responsibly. Or do you still not understand how viruses and vaccines work?

It appears you are struggling with that as well. These “vaccines” aren’t really vaccines in the traditional sense. They don’t prevent people from getting sick, or spreading it, apparently. Thus, even a vaccinated kid could be a “vector” to use your terminology.

*Significantly reduces* likelihood of catching, spreading, and experiencing severe illness or death.

Which is the “traditional” desired effect of vaccines.

The vaccines aren’t really vaccines is a NWNJ talking point. I suggest you don’t engage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still an emergency order correct? Which allowed it to be approved w caveats with only a 2000 kid study and only 6 months of longitudinal data, and a 25+ page liability waiver putting care of duty to the parental level, plus no one in the control group was ever getting sick so the data is statistically insignificant.

Basically it’s a bet.
A gamble that maybe it will help something sometime and not have any short term, medium term or long term negative effects. mRNA drug delivery system for pre-pubescent children.

USA is only country considering it. Other developed countries looked at the data and saw no reason for children to get innoculated- they were transmitting, they weren’t getting infected, and if they were they rarely got sick or had symptoms.

The effects of LongCOVID are real. I will be happy to take "the bet."

+1

Absolutely no hesitance to get vaccine - far safer than winging it with COVID. Increasing numbers of younger children ending up in ICU with severe COVID. Plus children can pass onto older relatives and other vulnerable adults in their lives.

Our private is highly recommending but not mandating .weekly
Tests required for unvaccinated children though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still an emergency order correct? Which allowed it to be approved w caveats with only a 2000 kid study and only 6 months of longitudinal data, and a 25+ page liability waiver putting care of duty to the parental level, plus no one in the control group was ever getting sick so the data is statistically insignificant.

Basically it’s a bet.
A gamble that maybe it will help something sometime and not have any short term, medium term or long term negative effects. mRNA drug delivery system for pre-pubescent children.

USA is only country considering it. Other developed countries looked at the data and saw no reason for children to get innoculated- they were transmitting, they weren’t getting infected, and if they were they rarely got sick or had symptoms.

The effects of LongCOVID are real. I will be happy to take "the bet."

+1

Absolutely no hesitance to get vaccine - far safer than winging it with COVID. Increasing numbers of younger children ending up in ICU with severe COVID. Plus children can pass onto older relatives and other vulnerable adults in their lives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we can look to Germany, as an example then.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-digest-germany-to-offer-vaccines-to-children-in-2022/a-59238911

Another Deutschle Welle article talks about the ongoing surge in children.

Germany- cases: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105465/coronavirus-covid-19-cases-age-group-germany/

Children are not the main source of cases.

Additional data- not speculative news reports: https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/438039/week13-covid-19-surveillance-report-eng.pdf

Sorry- this was the link for last year. Looking for this weeks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we can look to Germany, as an example then.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-digest-germany-to-offer-vaccines-to-children-in-2022/a-59238911

Another Deutschle Welle article talks about the ongoing surge in children.

Germany- cases: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105465/coronavirus-covid-19-cases-age-group-germany/

Children are not the main source of cases.

Additional data- not speculative news reports: https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/438039/week13-covid-19-surveillance-report-eng.pdf

Anonymous wrote:So we can look to Germany, as an example then.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-digest-germany-to-offer-vaccines-to-children-in-2022/a-59238911

Another Deutschle Welle article talks about the ongoing surge in children.

Germany- cases: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105465/coronavirus-covid-19-cases-age-group-germany/

Children are not the main source of cases.

From the Guardian, “Key among the unvaccinated are teenagers and children. For European countries, the UK was slower in starting their vaccination program for teens and that has been suggested as one of the reasons their cases started rising again. There is compelling data from both the UK and United States that children and teens have been a key driver of spread in recent months.”

So we can look to Germany, as an example then.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-digest-germany-to-offer-vaccines-to-children-in-2022/a-59238911

Another Deutschle Welle article talks about the ongoing surge in children.

In addition, from The NY Times, the headline is, “Children drive UK covid surge.“

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/10/29/world/europe/uk-britain-covid-surge.html

Or, maybe your point was that UK is different than Europe?

For instance, there are rising cases in children and the UK is responding to that.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-19/u-k-expands-vaccine-access-for-children-after-surge-in-schools

Anonymous wrote:Europe is having a huge covid wave right now, and children can spread it. It will help for them to be vaccinated I’m the US and there is no real downside. The myocarditis side effects have been way overblown.

The wave in Europe has nothing to do with children and whether they are vaccinated or not. A good number of the cases are adults, to include those vaccinated and almost all of the hospitalisations are unvaccinated adults or those over 70. Europe as a whole is also able to identify cases much quicker than the United States as a lot of people at the first sign of a symptom have an at-home test which were provided for free and then follow up with a PCR test. Also, you can't lump Europe together as one place as they have had vastly different approaches between countries. Please do some research or talk to people in Europe before making assumptions you know nothing about and making judgements without having a shred of data other than a headline. Vaccinating children in the United States will have little effect on the case load but providing medical interventions for issues, even minor, is the American way.

Both the benefit and the risk are not similar to traditional vaccines.
Everyone should be free to make the best choice for their child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 90% of kids 5-11 in these schools have been vaccinated over the next few weeks here are going to be the choices presented:

1. Mandate vaccines and potentially replace 10% of this age group. Given the waitlists to get into these schools, I doubt it will be a problem.
2. Run the school like the students all aren't vaccinated and cater to 10% of the school population.
3. Separate the kids who aren't vaccinated into their own classes with different protocols as restrictions ease.

All of the Upper Schools had the same choices and what did they do?...

Why? For parents who chose not to vaccinate, they should feel ok with their kids going to school with less protocols. Why should the school have to separate? We don't have separate super markets for vaccinated vs unvaccinated people. Our kids will be protected from the already slim chance of any health issues from Covid. I don't see these 'choices' as valid.

Why should it be ok for your unvaccinated kid to become a vector in the school when everyone else is acting responsibly. Or do you still not understand how viruses and vaccines work?

It appears you are struggling with that as well. These “vaccines” aren’t really vaccines in the traditional sense. They don’t prevent people from getting sick, or spreading it, apparently. Thus, even a vaccinated kid could be a “vector” to use your terminology.

*Significantly reduces* likelihood of catching, spreading, and experiencing severe illness or death.

Which is the “traditional” desired effect of vaccines.

It decreases the likelihood of catching the disease for about 3 months. That is not the desired effect of vaccines.

mRNA technology has been under research by Moderna for a very long time, as a drug for diseases. They decided in 2017 that mRNA is too risky for drugs that requires multiple doses because of the side effects they saw in trials so they never got approved. Then Moderna decided to make a vaccine with the mRNA since it would require a single dose, and not repetitive doses. But hey the current covid vaccines do require multiple doses. So mRNA should be under research right now for vaccines that require multiple doses over period. Until then, I cannot say this is a traditional vaccine with traditional risks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When 90% of kids 5-11 in these schools have been vaccinated over the next few weeks here are going to be the choices presented:

1. Mandate vaccines and potentially replace 10% of this age group. Given the waitlists to get into these schools, I doubt it will be a problem.
2. Run the school like the students all aren't vaccinated and cater to 10% of the school population.
3. Separate the kids who aren't vaccinated into their own classes with different protocols as restrictions ease.

All of the Upper Schools had the same choices and what did they do?...

Why? For parents who chose not to vaccinate, they should feel ok with their kids going to school with less protocols. Why should the school have to separate? We don't have separate super markets for vaccinated vs unvaccinated people. Our kids will be protected from the already slim chance of any health issues from Covid. I don't see these 'choices' as valid.

Why should it be ok for your unvaccinated kid to become a vector in the school when everyone else is acting responsibly. Or do you still not understand how viruses and vaccines work?

It appears you are struggling with that as well. These “vaccines” aren’t really vaccines in the traditional sense. They don’t prevent people from getting sick, or spreading it, apparently. Thus, even a vaccinated kid could be a “vector” to use your terminology.

*Significantly reduces* likelihood of catching, spreading, and experiencing severe illness or death.

Which is the “traditional” desired effect of vaccines.