I rarely challenge the decisions of JCVI but I really struggle to see the logic of stopping the antenatal vaccine offer with Autumn COVID 💉 campaign.
There is good evidence of protection against infection from maternally derived vaccine-induced antibodies in the first 6 months of an infant’s life.
There is good evidence of protection against infection from maternally derived vaccine-induced antibodies in the first 6 months of an infant’s life.
Reposted from
Prof Christina Pagel
THREAD: we urgently need to talk about babies & Covid - AGAIN.
A new paper has dropped looking at acute Covid-19 outcomes from Sep 2023-Apr 2024 by age for all England.
Except for deaths, babies under 6 mths old have HIGHEST risk of A&E, admission & SEVERE hospital admission across ALL ages 1/10
A new paper has dropped looking at acute Covid-19 outcomes from Sep 2023-Apr 2024 by age for all England.
Except for deaths, babies under 6 mths old have HIGHEST risk of A&E, admission & SEVERE hospital admission across ALL ages 1/10
Comments
Looking back, are there any other JCVI decisions that you feel actually *should* have been challenged?
Why are they being so precious with this vaccine?
The new JCVI advice specifies only “Immunosuppression” risk group in table 3 and 4 will be eligible.
I always like to have refs!
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44549-5
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46694-x
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-39989-y
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788986
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/doi/10.1542/peds.2023-064252/196616/Maternal-COVID-19-Vaccination-and-Prevention-of
…they’re not even going to be offering Covid vaccines to clinically vulnerable people (unless immunosuppressed) or health workers or the vast majority of people under 75!
And all because of a heavily flawed bespoke cost-effective analysis… ⬇️
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.11.12.24317146v1.full.pdf+html
https://www.fhi.no/ss/korona/koronavaksinasjonsprogrammet/koronavaksine/#vaksineanbefalinger-for-sesongen-20242025
https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/smittskydd-beredskap/vaccinationer/rekommendationer-for-vaccination/rekommendationer-om-vaccination-mot-covid-19/
*Even if* infant admissions are mostly low acuity, *even if* threshold for admission is low (eg precautionary), *even if* we remove emotion
It’s still a hospital admission, it’s still a burden on the NHS, and it’s still very expensive.
Why would we not want to prevent that?
I would very much like to see a VEhosp for babies of vaccinated mothers, which should be possible with the England data, as I expect the main beneficiaries of antenatal vax program is the babies.
"It’s still a hospital admission, it’s still a burden on the NHS, and it’s still very expensive.
Why would we not want to prevent that?"
I'm seeing very little interest in prevention at all. This JCVI decision simply fits with everything else we're (not) doing.
If vaccines are unlicensed for babies under 6m, we can give to mum to confer some immunity to their babies when most vulnerable. We do this for:
• influenza
• whooping cough
• RSV