Would you be happy for your children to receive covid-19 vaccine

"...There's very little stats on the likelihood of transmission by vaccinated people simply because it's hard to find cases...."

That's true. But You can kind of see it indirectly in the stats. As vaccination increased the number of cases (transmissions) declined. This isn't the full story though. As we had lockdown, isolation, masks etc., which also had a similar effect. But then we also opened up allowing people to mingle. often in the younger ages groups when they were mainly unvaccinated, which then caused a rises in case. Which is the reason for vaccinating younger ages groups. Also not everyone has the same Vaccine. Some are more effective than others, against new strains, delta etc. Even if everyone was vaccinated, when we open the numbers will still rise, as the Vaccines do not have a 100% success rate.

The idea is all these measures drive the numbers down, both in cases, and hospitalizations. Down to a sustainable level. Are their concerns with Vaccine. Sure. Is there a better performing alternative no. Should be stop vaccinations while we have nothing better. Logic suggests no.

But isn't that essentially "Treat me like an idiot, but don't let me know you're treating me like an idiot because then I'll get angry".

The facts and data are in abundance and repeated very often (witness again above someone having to be corrected about transmission pre and post vaccination), if someone is coming onto a message board and willfully ignoring the data, they can't expect to go unchallenged because it might make them feel silly, human nature just doesn't work that way, the slightest bit of validation for their viewpoint becomes reinforcement to continue making silly decisions into the future, which gets worse when all the anti-vax tropes start leaking in (they're not approved, they were rushed, they don't stop infection, they effect fertility etc.). I've said this before, but the amount of data points for the vaccine vs. basically every other medicine developed in the last couple of decades is off the scale to the point where we can detect the really really rare effects, there is no concerns about safety, the experts who look at this data are absolutely clear on this.

Only if you feel people care that you think them an idiot or not. This is really not their message. It's the equivalent of extolling the superior qualities of a new Samsung phone when all they want is a phone to take pics of family and use that "WhatsApp thingy". With respect, this is long and very boring even for me. Far too much science in it for some people.

You have to get to their concerns whatever they are. The HSE have engaged with frontline staff to do that to boost vaccination rates, even though the numbers are small. You're also ignoring the aim, to get more people vaccinated. If some can be persuaded to do so, who cares what they think?

We kind of had this with the travellers who were being targeted for J&J so they could get 1 shot and be done with it (knowing that getting them back for a second shot would be problematic) que spokesperson coming out and saying they wanted Pfizer as they thought it was the "better" vaccine, so it created a demand in a group that would normally see low uptake. The government have been quite good at dripfeeding demand to encourage high uptake, it's uncertain whether this was planned or happened by accident :)

The lady on Clair Byrne earlier who was involved in the process for recommending vaccine for over 12 year olds was very specific and precise with her wording. The recommendation was to offer vaccines to children in that age group. The recommendation was not that children in that age group to take it but offer it. Covering themselves from any fallout in advance.

And if people have irrational concerns? Would you point out that they are irrational, or just give up in case you offend them?

As a simple example "I want to wait longer", you can point out that waiting longer won't change anything and that waiting is increasing the risk in the meantime (especially with school starting again in ~5 weeks), but if that is still their response, there is nowhere else to go, you might even try and get them to say what longer means (next week/month/year/decade), in those cases, I believe, you can only point out the irrationality of the position and at least the person has to come to terms with that fact themselves, they may not reply as such (as it means backing down) but at least they have to own the position and can't blame others for it (which seems to be the way these days, they didn't say it was that dangerous).

You're right, the starting point should be finding out the concerns and then presenting data in a way to allay those concerns, if the person continues those concerns, you need to point out their ignorance (as nicely as possible), if it continues, you'll often find their goal is to spread misinformation among others or to get enough other people in their group that their stance can be justified (thus the danger of the Facebook echo chamber).

The last paragraph could be applied to those fully vaccinated but still have the irrational fear of indoor dining or flying.

There has been a lot of irrational thinking the past year and a half.

Why the rush to pressure parents into vaccinating their children? We will likely achieve decent herd immunity at some point. Does anyone really think that if 90% of the population were vaccinated tomorrow everything would immediately revert to normal? We will have restrictions right through this Winter at least, regardless of how many we vaccinate.

If herd immunity is declared it will be after a long period of observation and further study. In the meantime vaccines will continue to be administered and those hesitant will have time to make/change their decision.

Achieving herd immunity in Ireland only will not stop variants.

It looks like those pushing hardest for vaccination of children are doing so from a place of fear, not rationality. Rollout for under 12s will be soon enough, those concerned for their children’s safely from long-covid will be able to get their children vaccinated, and more will follow in time.

Can you define what ‘enough study’ means.

These vaccines have been subjected to the most intense studies and research ever seen … billions of does have been administered and never heard of before resources and cooperation globally have been directed to them.

So I’d be interested as to what you believe as ‘enough study’ is ?

so you'd be happy to keep the virus mutating and spreading around for a few years then ?

Also - what would you be concerned about in the vaccine that would hinder growing children which hasn't been factored in by the masses of actual scientists and researchers ?

Why are you not concerned with the effects of Covid on a growing child?

Mutations will happen in any environment where it can spread. There may well be mutations already from ireland .. but none that were significant enough to merit global news like the UK and Delta variants ... however .. just because it hasn't happened does not mean it can't happen.

The likes of Brazil and India will have far more mutations than ireland .. so the chances of a significant mutation there is obviously greater .. but does not rule out it happening in ireland.

i'd leave that to the scientists .. but it is a risk to public health and one that needs to be managed. The child population is a significant proportion of the population to allow a virus to spread easily and widely and a risk that needs to be managed.

As I've mentioned before my 12 year old daughter is fully vaccinated and my wife is a scientist in the pharmaceutical industry - as part of her job she has seen and read a huge amount of the research etc and had no issues with the vaccine for her.

So i'll be trusting the science

Dr Martin Feeley senior doctor at the HSE says Covid-19 is “much less severe” than the average annual flu

People put their own kids welfare first? Colour me shocked