CDC ACIP Meeting, Day 1, June 17, 2022 — Dr. Liz Mumper

Print

Link copied

Always important to distinguish which child deaths were directly from COVID as opposed to being hospitalized with another condition and being tested routinely. PCR tests can also be false positives.

If 71% of babies to 4 year olds have evidence of recovering from SARS CoV2, they have broader natural immunity that the narrow target “protection” from COVID jab.

Did she show number of patient who died? That would be important to compare to deaths under-reported to VAERS in association with the COVID jab.

Flu vaccine may be recommended for all kids every year but uptake is low, often in the 30-40% range.

202 deaths in >500,000 cases needs to be compared to the 1 in 2,700 rate of myocarditis after COVID vax. 202 deaths are tragic, but how many could have been prevented with early treatment suppressed

The parents out of work argument was made for use of varicella vaccine. Childen pox used to confer lifelong immunity; varivax does not. Risk of death from c pox 90/year

Death rate in infants & toddlers 1 in 2821 by these numbers. Risk is actually much less since so many babies have no symptoms. So the denominator is much higher for infection and survival.

Parents worry about 1-10% risk of MIS=C. If it is 1 in 3,500, the risk is far less than 1%, statistically near zero.

Moderna and Pfizer’s own endpoint data fall short of the 50% mark. Any protection is very short lived – a matter of weeks to months. Then it has negative efficacy, meaning vaxxed more likely to get.

Pfizer showed an estimate of 80.3% vaccine efficacy is based on 7 cases in the placebo group and 3 in the vaccine group. These numbers are ridiculously small, – the 80% may not stand if more numbers

Remember the shots were based on the Wuhan strain – now we have several generations of variants. Evolutionary biologists cautioned about vaccinating without stopping transmission – predicted variants

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to June 3, 2022, for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds show: • 1,658 adverse events, including 63 cases rated as serious and 3 reported deaths.

It is not so important how good a vaccine is at generating antibodies to Wuhan strain. Need long term data about impact of shot on number of kids who get COVID in community and have severe or mild.

49 states have already bough vaccines for children in the age groups being debated. Seems like a done deal.

The risk of a child dying if they have a diagnosis is 1,086/10,700,00 or 1086/10700000 = 0.00010149532. The risk of any child dying of COVID-19 over this time period is 1,086/73000000 = 0.00001487671.

I am not seeing or hearing any new content, so will continue to insert important information.

AJohns Hopkins studymonitoring 48,000 children diagnosedwith COVID showed a zero mortality ratein children under 18 without comorbidities.

Relatively few hospitalizations after Omicron – isn’t that the situation we are in now as they debate givng the shots?

Waning immunity and progression to negative efficacy – we need to closely track the timing of those issues

Let’s look at the big picture – 2 shots plus booster, then at 58 days efficacy better – protection for 2 months in context of hughe increase in reports of vax injury, some very severe.

One of the hazards of presenting selected slides from complex papers is the reality that sometimes abstracts and excerpts do not accurately convey the nuances and limitations of the publication.

On important “not known” issue is the impact of lipid nanoparticles going preferentially to the ovaries of babies – we won’t know impact on their fertility for 2 decades.

I wish they would show a comparison of the mRNA vax side effects vs typical childhood shots. Number and severity of adverse events orders of magnitude higher for these shots.

Bigest gap is lack of long term follow up on multiple dimensions of children’s health!!!

Is anyone looking at impact of spike protein crossing the blood brain barrier – is CDC looking at cognitive function, markers of prion disease, etc.?

Quick waning of protection from thse shots – let’s compare to people using good nutrition, keeping their Vit D in the 60-80 range, taking Quercetin, Zinc and IVM or HCQ. Suppression early treatment!

In Portugal, the most highly vaccinated are getting COVID and populating the hospitals. Need to learn from our colleagues there and in Israel!

Getting lost in the weeds of vaccinology techniques, overlooking the main issues of natural immunity and risk vs. benefits.

Kids who have already had COVID at risk for antibody enhanced disease and potentially worse outcomes and higher rate of side effects.

Look for new book by Hooker & Kennedy “Vaxxed/Unvaxxed” showing data from >100 published papers looking at chronic disease – higher in vax’d than undervax’d.

Brian Hooker other author above

COVID is worse for immunocompromised, but clinical trials do not include enough of these patients to know anything about how well they work, and what side effects happen.

Why such high rates of adverse reactions in the placebo group. What is in the placebo? Saline should not lead to high side effects.

1273 subjects not powered high enough to find myocarditis, which happens in about 1 in 2,700 in 2 independent studies (Asia and Kaiser)

Previously 50% was the threshold.

Respiratory symptoms are very frequent in kids. If you combine with a positive PCR and acknowledge significant chance of false positive, you get different results.

Everybody and his brother got into the home antigen test business and I am not sure how much to trust. One test shows 36% false negtives, but claims it does not miss true positives.

A classic pediatric adage is “kids are not small adults” Bothers me to hear “we would expect the same in kids as in adults.”

I am much less worried about the short term fevers as I am about long term effects. What lab follow up did they do? Complete blood counts and platelet counts? Chemistries to look for hepatitis?

Continuing: did they do markers for clotting?

She said for the record the placeo was saline. Still puzzled why placebo side effects so many….hmm

Dr. Sanchez seems to listen carefully. I appreciate his pressing the speaker.

the question is about exclusion criteria for respiratory conditions – speaker says acute fevers excluded, could not have COVID w/in 14 days

COVID is worse in those with underlying conditions. “A very representative sample” w 15-20% obesity and 5% asthma. Did exclude severe immune deficiencies – but presume those patients will get these

Rollover to provide omicron shots – will get immunogenecity data by fall

plan to boost 3 months after the primary series…wonder what the top number of booster per year will land

Baby Cove – 3 months olds and premature babies!

Would have been nice if they looked with lab markers like d dimers, plat counts or sed rates; maybe some Echocardiograms

Yes, nonspecific symptoms – so Pharma has a responsibility to look with testing!!

We know that T cell immunity is quite important; shots target humoral immunity; natural infection recovery response is broader

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/CHD-Letter-to-FDA-VRBPAC-2022-06-10.pdf – summary of reasons CHD opposes COVID shots in infants & toddlers & kids

Pediatricians have already been told it is OK to co-administer COVID shots with other vax – she admits here that is a study they hope to do in the future – we do not have data about if it is safe

Again, am puzzled by the high rate of poor appetite in placebo groups, much higher than seen in prior childhood vax

Would be nice to know if developmental assessments were done at the 6 month follow up time

This series of slides deserves scrutiny. First, using immunobridging lab data to infer efficacy. Omicron less effective after 2 doses, so booster indicated according to speaker.

Want to scrutinized “inferred: immunity, post hoc analysis methods, and comparisons made with older age groups.

Risk of side effects happens with each dose – so we need to factor in at least 3 doses when we imagine how many kids with have adverse events.

look at the axis labeling – the lines depart but the numeric difference is not very significant!

using experience of adults and elderly to make recommendations for babies, as their data did not meet classic cut offs for adequate protection

pharmacovigilence plans would be more reassuring if we had seen these regulators pay attetion to VAERS red flag signals

Does that mean the difference is a 15% chance of COVID if vax’d and 22% if not vaxxed over 210 days? Might be worth consider that amount of decreased risk compared to risk of AEs from 3 shots.

Numbers are too small! and babies at 6 months have very different immune systems from adults.

Babies have fewer ACE receptors than adults – that has an impact on how well the virus can attach and cause real problems. No one has mentioned this that I noticed.

This study was done apart from rotavirus and live MMRV – so when they are given together in practice as docs have been reassured we should do, we are part of a big experiment and so is the baby.

Yes, it was confusing. They chose 16-25 yo from the original study. Sets the bar high for the immune antibody response. Basis for their non-inferiority measures. Now omicron major threat: need 3