"The AAP's vaccine schedule diverges from the CDC schedule under Kennedy on the recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines. After Kennedy's unilateral change, the CDC no longer recommends routine COVID-19 vaccination for healthy children, but allows for the shots after a conversation with a child's doctor. In contrast, the AAP—the largest pediatrics association in the country—recommends the shots for all children ages 6 months to 23 months, as well as high-risk children aged 2 to 18. Children not in these age or risk groups should also have access to the shots if desired, the AAP guidance says."
Is there like a standardized risk scale for understanding odds in medicine? I mean, I probably have a 1 in a million chance of dying every month I choose to drive regularly, but if I were to argue with an anti-vaxxer, or try to determine my own risk tolerance, has someone developed a standardized way of understanding risk/odds? At what level do you say "This is a risky vaccine"?
Statistically, yes, emotionally? No. Like there are hands at poker it is logical to go all in on, that one would probably not go all in on if your life was at stake. You can theoretically always rebuild a bank roll.
But because it’s all numbers, books have been written about poker to help people intuitively understand what the odds mean, and how to play the odds over a game/career. Have similar books been written about medicine?
I actually disagree with you, yes, the numbers are the same, but the game theory is completely different.
It has been years now since it was shown the COVID vaccine does nothing for kids and only has the potential to harm young men under the age of 24. The fact that the AAP is so anti-science shows how indoctrinated people are to politics and not science. It's crazy to suggest a vaccine that does not have any benefits for children 2 and under, it's horrifying they are so blinded by politics.
The evidence shows this claim is incorrect. COVID-19 vaccines provide measurable protection for children, including ages 6 months to 2 years, by reducing emergency visits and hospitalizations. Infants under 6 months, who cannot be vaccinated, are protected through maternal vaccination during pregnancy, which cuts their hospitalization risk by more than half. While myocarditis after vaccination is a rare side effect in young men, most cases are mild and resolve, and the risk of myocarditis is higher after COVID-19 infection than after vaccination. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends vaccination based on this balance of benefits and risks, not politics.
The CDC's recommendations align with European health authorities.
Why does the AAP feel that the CDC and Europe's guidelines are too conservative?
"The AAP's vaccine schedule diverges from the CDC schedule under Kennedy on the recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines. After Kennedy's unilateral change, the CDC no longer recommends routine COVID-19 vaccination for healthy children, but allows for the shots after a conversation with a child's doctor. In contrast, the AAP—the largest pediatrics association in the country—recommends the shots for all children ages 6 months to 23 months, as well as high-risk children aged 2 to 18. Children not in these age or risk groups should also have access to the shots if desired, the AAP guidance says."
Is there like a standardized risk scale for understanding odds in medicine? I mean, I probably have a 1 in a million chance of dying every month I choose to drive regularly, but if I were to argue with an anti-vaxxer, or try to determine my own risk tolerance, has someone developed a standardized way of understanding risk/odds? At what level do you say "This is a risky vaccine"?
The beauty of odds is that, as ratios, they are universal and work the same in medicine as in sports betting or elections.
Statistically, yes, emotionally? No. Like there are hands at poker it is logical to go all in on, that one would probably not go all in on if your life was at stake. You can theoretically always rebuild a bank roll.
But because it’s all numbers, books have been written about poker to help people intuitively understand what the odds mean, and how to play the odds over a game/career. Have similar books been written about medicine?
I actually disagree with you, yes, the numbers are the same, but the game theory is completely different.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort
It has been years now since it was shown the COVID vaccine does nothing for kids and only has the potential to harm young men under the age of 24. The fact that the AAP is so anti-science shows how indoctrinated people are to politics and not science. It's crazy to suggest a vaccine that does not have any benefits for children 2 and under, it's horrifying they are so blinded by politics.
The evidence shows this claim is incorrect. COVID-19 vaccines provide measurable protection for children, including ages 6 months to 2 years, by reducing emergency visits and hospitalizations. Infants under 6 months, who cannot be vaccinated, are protected through maternal vaccination during pregnancy, which cuts their hospitalization risk by more than half. While myocarditis after vaccination is a rare side effect in young men, most cases are mild and resolve, and the risk of myocarditis is higher after COVID-19 infection than after vaccination. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends vaccination based on this balance of benefits and risks, not politics.
Literally no credible research supports your conclusions. The only one being ideological here is you.
I haven't seen those studies, care to link them?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/mm7233a2.htm
Oh, you didn’t want studies showing that the COVID vaccine saved lives, sorry.