Parents ‘will be able to get five to 11-year-olds vaccinated’ as government advisers says jabs should be rolled out to children on a ‘non-urgent’ basis

• Children aged 5 to 11 are set to be offered ‘non-urgent’ Covid vaccinations
• Government’s scientific advisers said to have agreed jabs can be made available 
• Optional offer seen within Government as preferable to a firm recommendation 

Covid vaccines are set to be offered to children aged five to 11, it was reported last night.

The government’s scientific advisers are said to have agreed that the jabs should be made available to youngsters on a ‘non-urgent’ basis. 

This means parents would be given the option to have their young children vaccinated, a move that could ‘prevent a small number of hospitalisations’.

This optional offer is seen as a preferable approach to a firm recommendation.

It is claimed the guidance is likely to suggest the matter is not pressing, but something that families may wish to consider in order to protect against ‘a potential future wave’.

Families planning half-term holidays next week have complained that the lack of jabs for under-12s in this country has limited their options for flying to certain other countries in Europe.

Covid vaccines are set to be offered to children aged five to 11, it was reported last night. Pictured: 11-year-old Xavier Aquilina receives a Covid-19 vaccination at the Emberbrook Community Health Centre in Surrey

Rather than making such a move a firm recommendation, parents are expected to be offered the shots on a ‘non-urgent’ basis should they wish to take it up

Rather than making such a move a firm recommendation, parents are expected to be offered the shots on a ‘non-urgent’ basis should they wish to take it up. 

Families will be told they may wish to consider inoculating their children so they could better protect them ‘against a potential future wave’. 

Earlier this week, Paul Hunter, a leading professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia, suggested any decision would now been too late to influence the current wave of Covid.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘I think in many ways we’re past the point where vaccines are actually going to make much difference.’

Prof Hunter said jabs were given to older children to protect them from disruptions to schooling, but added: ‘We haven’t seen that vaccines have actually done a huge amount to stop these interruptions, so I think the benefits are marginal and it’s probably too late because most kids have already had omicron.’

The UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation had been divided on whether or not youngsters should be offered the jab in recent months.

The JCVI are understood to have recommended vaccines should at least be offered to children under-12 – but it not yet clear if that advice had been formalised with ministers and health chiefs.

Vaccines Minister Maggie Throup said: ‘I would like parents and guardians to be reassured that no new vaccine for children would have been approved unless the expected standards of safety, quality and effectiveness had been met.

‘I encourage as many as possible to make sure they get their child the jab when contacted – the paediatric vaccine will offer the best possible protection for your child’.

A paediatric formula of the Pfizer/BioNTech shot had already been approved for use in children aged five to 11 if they were clinically vulnerable or shared a household with someone who was immunosuppressed.

Around 500,000 children are understood to fall within that category in the UK. 

GP and deputy lead for NHS vaccination programme Dr Nikki Kanani, said: ‘We know vaccines give significant protection against severe illness from COVID – including the omicron variant, so it is important that our youngest and most at-risk get protected.

‘The NHS is now vaccinating the most at risk 5-11 year olds ensuring they get their vital dose of protection.

‘Thousands of young people are still getting protected every day with millions vaccinated so far and we are asking parents not to delay coming forward – as soon as the NHS contacts you, please come forward so the NHS can protect their youngest against the virus’.

It comes as No10’s scientific advisers condemned Boris Johnson’s plans start living with Covid like it is the flu by lifting all restrictions in a fortnight, warning it could create ‘anxiety’ and disproportionately affect poor people. 

A SAGE subcommittee told the Government to consider the ‘unintended consequences’ before taking the unprecedented decision to scrap compulsory self-isolation, masks, mass-testing and other remaining curbs in England. 

The experts claim abandoning free lateral flows — which have cost the UK taxpayer billions so far — will lead to Covid becoming ‘hidden’ and mask any future outbreaks. Ditching the policy could create ‘ambiguity’ about the seriousness of the pandemic and make the public less likely to take personal precautions.

They argue that scrapping the compulsory isolation period without improving sick pay may force poorer people to go to work even if they are ill and risk spreading the virus to vulnerable.

The warnings were raised at a meeting of the Spi-B behavioural expert committee that feeds into SAGE on Thursday, a day after the Prime Minister revealed he intends to drop remaining curbs in England within weeks. 

The PM’s announcement was widely seen as a ploy to appease hardline anti-lockdown backbenchers and fend off a flurry of no-confidence letters following a spate of allegations about illegal lockdown parties in Downing Street. 

A document detailing the concerns was made public tonight — despite minutes from SAGE meetings often taking weeks to be published online.

Spi-B is made up of almost 50 of the UK’s top behavioural scientists, including former Communist Party member Professor Susan Michie, and Professor Stephen Reicher, a social psychologist and vocal critic of Mr Johnson. 

They also called for Covid messaging to be taken from central government and given to public health and NHS agencies, in the wake of the ‘partygate’ scandal that has engulfed Westminster over the last few weeks.

‘Cross-national studies have shown that people have higher confidence in health advice from health professionals and scientists compared to politicians,’ they write, adding ‘this is particularly the case when trust in government is low’.

Source: Read Full Article