Children may need to be vaccinated against Covid-19 so that the UK population can reach herd immunity, according to an adviser to the UK Government’s vaccine taskforce.
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has approved the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine for use among children aged 12 and over but the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is yet to decide whether they should receive it.
The UK’s vaccination programme is only open to adults, and some children in exceptional circumstances, and so far 62.4% of the adult population have been fully vaccinated.
Across the whole population, 49.2% of people are double-jabbed.
Experts are divided on whether children should be vaccinated, given that the risk to themselves from Covid-19 is low.
Professor Jeffrey Almond told Sky News that jabs for young people could be needed to reach the benchmark for herd immunity.
READ MORE: Booster jags could be offered to vulnerable groups from September
“At the start of this we reckoned that you needed somewhere around 65% to 70% of the whole population to be immune in order to have that herd immunity which prevents the virus spreading,” he said.
“Because, with 80% of the adult population (vaccinated), if that only represents 50% of the whole population, we’re still too low to prevent the virus spreading and it will spread in kids.
“So, I’m in favour, if we can and when we can, of vaccinating children as well so that the whole population is immune to the point where the virus can no longer circulate.”
His comments were echoed by Martin McKee, professor of European public health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and a member of Independent Sage, who said there was a clear case for vaccinating children.
He told Times Radio: “I think people in the JCVI, who are looking at this from the perspective of the individual child and looking at the risk/benefit balance, are less enthusiastic about vaccinating children, but I’m a public health physician. From a population perspective, it’s very clear that we have to vaccinate children.”
However, Calum Semple, a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) and professor of child health and outbreak medicine at the University of Liverpool, expressed his reservations about vaccinating children.
He told BBC Breakfast: “The risk of severe harm to children (from Covid) is incredibly low. Vaccines are safe, but not entirely risk-free.
“I’m not convinced the evidence base there is strong enough to support vaccination of children because we don’t have complete safety data for the vaccines that we would want to use.”
Elsewhere, Professor Anthony Harnden, deputy chairman of the JCVI, suggested that a decision on vaccinating children will be made in the “forthcoming weeks”.
Prof Semple also said additional symptoms found in people in their 20s and 30s, such as fatigue, headaches, a sore throat and diarrhoea, should be added to the Government’s list of Covid symptoms.
READ MORE: Third dose of AstraZeneca vaccine could be used for booster shots
He told BBC Breakfast: “As older people are vaccinated, proportionally more younger people are having disease and they have a different group of symptoms.
“By extending the symptom list, we think we’ll pick up about a third more cases. But, more importantly, we’ll pick them up a day earlier and that offers greater opportunity to break transmission chains and stop further spread of the virus.”
He added that the challenge is to make sure people are getting the “right” test for their symptoms but also encouraged anyone who is feeling unwell with any of the coronavirus symptoms to get tested.
“We don’t want to overwhelm the PCR testing; we probably want to encourage more people to do lateral flow testing in the community, and then get a PCR to confirm it,” he said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel