Children, including very young children, can develop COVID-19. Many of them have no symptoms. Those that do get sick tend to experience milder symptoms such as low-grade fever, fatigue, and cough. Some children have had severe complications, but this has been less common. Children with underlying health conditions may be at increased risk for severe illness.
A potentially severe and dangerous complication can occur in children. Called multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), it can lead to life-threatening problems with the heart and other organs in the body. In this condition, different body parts, such as the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal organs, can become inflamed.
Although it is not yet clear how many children in the U.S. have been affected by this “long-COVID” syndrome, studies show that up to 40 percent of children in Italy and approximately 15-20 percent of children in England are experiencing “long-haul” COVID-19 symptoms.
Yeah, the mortality rate for kids is really low. That does not mean they are immune or won’t suffer long term effects.
Our local grade school district has a rule for the standard childhood vaccines - if your child is not vaccinated and one of these diseases (Measles, mumps, etc.) is confirmed at the school, your child can not attend for the next 2 weeks.
Once the COVID vaccines are available to kids, this seems like more than reasonable, and I suspect that the anti-vax parents would soon tire of having to take time off of work themselves to deal with their kids being constantly at home.
A long hauler is anyone who has any persistent symptom after a month. So if you are achy for 6 weeks, you’re a covid long hauler. That doesn’t mean you’ll suffer from what most people would call “long term effects”
That might be the most that’s politically feasible in your district, but the net effect is that it punishes the children for their parents’ decision. Even in the past year when schools have been making a real effort to reach remote students, the results have still been far inferior to in-person education.
The proper approach is to not even allow enrollment in public schools at all, without all of the standard vaccinations.
But Freedumb! And Religious exemptions! And this guy who makes a whole lot of money speaking about how the vaccine schedule is too compressed and should be spread out! See, these are as valid educationally as Intelligent Design!
OK, humor and sarchasm aside, I actually do think it’s a viable compromise (on the standard childhood vaccines) - I don’t care which of the above are your reasons for not vaccinating your child, but if you don’t, and one of the diseases comes into our school, your kid can’t come. If we, as a society, have decided that mandated vaccines are too much of an infringement on personal privacy, then this is a reasonable response. Again, I’m imagining this in the COVID environment. It’s still a pandemic - there’s going to be cases in the school pretty much weekly, if not daily. The anti-vaxxers are going to get really sick of being at home with their kids for a third year.
I wouldn’t mind a requirement, with a long warning period, that to be admitted to a hospital for covid related medical treatment you need either a proof of vaccine or a document that proves you were not medically cleared to receive a vaccine. Exceptions would be made for the children or mentally infirm (i.e. people who are not their own guardians.)
People refusing the vaccine should not be taking up hospital resources or subjecting other hospital patients and staff to their disease. They chose to opt out of a medical preventative, so fuck em.
Too far. What about smokers? People who didn’t wear helmets on their motorcycles or bicycles? People with AIDS? Many of these people could have controlled their behavior somehow.
It’s not fair to schools, though. Lessons for kids at home have to be completely redesigned, which takes an inordinate amount of time for a handful of kids. And the school and teachers are then held accountable for the student’s performance.
Basically, this is an unfunded mandate. If you want to put it in place, it needs to be funded.
I share the sentiment on some level but the medical community takes an oath to treat them whether they’re responsible for their own predicament or not. Drunk drivers and opioid users shouldn’t be taking up resources either, but they do, and medical staff treat them without prejudice. People did stupid shit in the pre-pandemic world, they’re doing it now, and they’ll keep doing it long after we’re done with COVID.
That sounds sweet and all, but remember that “the medical community” is made up of individuals who fall somewhere on a bell curve. For every Jonas Salk there’s a guy banking money he swindled from Medicare.
No disagreement, but I was responding to the idea that hospitals should turn away the unvaccinated. Probably a majority of hospital patients are laying in a hospital bed or in an ER because of poor lifestyle decisions, be they the result of one act of stupidity or the cumulative effects of living an unwise, unhealthy lifestyle.
I’m not above imposing community punishment on the unvaccinated but I’d rather apply it in ways that are proactive, not reactive (i.e. saying you can’t work here, eat here, go to school here if you don’t vaccinate) - that I fully support in principle, though in practicum, a combination of sticks and carrots might be more effective.
The medical profession is regulated by law, laws trump their oaths, if people are legally prohibited from admittance to a hospital on public health/safety grounds the hospital would not have the option to admit them.
If (when) the shit hits the fan in areas with big covid surges (eg. Louisiana, Arkansas, etc), then hospitals are going to have to triage patients with all sorts of problems who arrive at the emergency dept.
Who gets priority? A heart attack victim or a car accident victim? Or someone who has covid and is unvaccinated and is in denial about what they have? Decisions will have to be made in the event that there are no ICU beds available nearby or in any nearby state. I know what I’d decide.
As karmically satisfying as it might be to deny medical care to the unvaccinated, it would set an utterly horrifying precedent. The exact same argument could be used to deny medical care to smokers with lung cancer, or even obese Type 2 diabetics.
Couldn’t agree more, as the parent of two school-age children who attend NYC public schools (and one child too young for school).
Right now the United Federation of Teachers (NYC’s teachers’ union) is opposed to mandatory vaccination for teachers, but on board with mandatory vaccination for students (as age permits).
Seems inconsistent and really not in the right spirit to me, but that’s the situation we’re in.
Agreed, mostly. But if it is a triage problem, I don’t have much of a problem with pushing the unvaccinated who need ventilators behind anyone else who needs a bed.
FWIW I view simply telling these people they aren’t eligible for limited emergency / ICU services to be far less invasive than what some are suggesting–which is the serious step of mandating vaccines using government force.