25 million kids missed routine vaccinations because of COVID

About 25 million children worldwide have missed out on routine immunizations against common diseases like diptheria, largely because the coronavirus pandemic disrupted regular health services or triggered misinformation about vaccines, according to the U.N.

And because the coronavirus pandemic shed light on misinformation about vaccines.

In March 2020, WHO and partners asked countries to suspend their polio eradication efforts amid the accelerating COVID-19 pandemic. 

That doesn't sound like good advice; suspending vaccinations used against a crippling disease!

Also in March 2020 the WHO recommended against wearing masks to prevent Covid infections.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-recommendation-trnd/index.html

There have since been dozens of polio epidemics in more than 30 countries.

The WHO really blew that one. Shame on that agency

As a result, children suffer.

The WHO should have listened to the scientific experts:

Scientists said low vaccine coverage rates had already resulted in preventable outbreaks of diseases like measles and polio.

In March 2020, WHO and partners asked countries to suspend their polio eradication efforts amid the accelerating COVID-19 pandemic. 

That doesn't sound like good advice; suspending vaccinations used against a crippling disease!

The WHO might have had a point, considering that before covid19, most polio cases were caused by vaccine rather than by wild virus:

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/polio-cases-now-caused-vaccine-wild-virus-67287290

And because the coronavirus pandemic shed light on misinformation about vaccines.

Mostly by antivaxxer groups that desperately tried to misrepresent the value of vaccines even when it became obvious they were extremely useful at saving lives. One small silver lining is that now a lot of that misleading propaganda was made evident by the success of the covid vaccination.

That doesn't sound like good advice; suspending vaccinations used against a crippling disease!

As the article explains clearly this was a necessary sacrifice to avoid unnecessary deaths at a time where spreading meant patients would die if things were done as usual. It is justified according to the experts.

Also in March 2020 the WHO recommended against wearing masks to prevent Covid infections.

No, that is still your invalid misrepresentation disproved repeatedly, the WHO, the CDC and every other scientific and medical institution recommended masks to be prioritized for hospitals where they had demonstrated efficacy, not for asymptomatic people on the street because at that point there was no evidence it would be useful.

You have been requested to bring information that contradict this recommendation from before the pandemic begin, but never have brought it, your argument depends completely on the world experts having time machines to know data from the future, which of course makes no sense.

The WHO should have listened to the scientific experts:

What scientific experts have said the suspension is not justifed? making up imaginary experts is not an argument. There is a difference between recognizing the negative effects of a necessary measure and saying that measure was not justified in the first place.

The WHO might have had a point, considering that before covid19, most polio cases were caused by vaccine rather than by wild virus:

Your own source clearly says the cases are on unvaccinated children. If anything it supports the fact that vaccines should be more widely distributed.

Parents and health authorities should expend more efforts in ensuring kids get vaccinations that ARE safe and effective instead of the covid ones that aren't.

So any attempt to smear me as an anti-vaxxer is completely invalid.

I don't have a problem with most of them, as long as there is proper informed consent involved. But there has been so much dishonesty from vaccine makers, governments and health authorities about the safety and effectiveness of the covid vaccines, I won't be letting our child anywhere near them, but he'll be getting the others under informed consent from the doctor. If there's a risk we're concerned about, we'll consider the options on a case-by-case basis. No medical treatment should ever get carte-blanche treatment because the human body is so complex.

Parents and health authorities should expend more efforts in ensuring kids get vaccinations that ARE safe and effective instead of the covid ones that aren't.

So any attempt to smear me as an anti-vaxxer is completely invalid.

False, irrational arguments that are repeated even after proved so should be corrected, no matter how the people that repeat them call themselves. Making invalid accusations that are not congruent with the reality is part of those arguments that need to be corrected, if the scientific and medical consensus say the vaccines are safe and effective just accusing them to be wrong without giving any proof about it is obviously not something rational.

If we take a proper angle, which is 25 million of kids out of 2.2 billion in total, the conclusion will be: COVID19 has negligible effect on vaccination schedule for kids. And that sentence should be the correct caption for the article.

If we take a proper angle, which is 25 million of kids out of 2.2 billion in total, the conclusion will be: COVID19 has negligible effect on vaccination schedule for kids. And that sentence should be the correct caption for the article

That would assume the children that were not vaccinated are evenly distributed around the world, but this is not the case according to the article. If regions already struggling with their vaccination rates and that have other problems that make the vaccination much more important (such as malnutrition) that would mean problems will happen in those locations while vaccination is completely fine in other countries.

What are medical trials for?

. No medical treatment should ever get carte-blanche treatment because the human body is so complex.

fallaffelToday  05:27 pm JST

I see, so basically every country approved their vaccine without seeing the trial results? Actually I'm sure mainstream media would love this story if it were true....

Of course it's true, and very easy to prove if you have a little bit of curiosity. But I'm not going to do your work for you. Pfizer released results that were favourable to its own cause, and concealed results that showed serious adverse effects. The regulatory authorities approved the vaccines without the proverbial second look due to the so-called emergency use, adverse effects be damned, while at the same time banning or effectively banning any existing competing treatments.

Hence the need for the successful court case against Pfizer and its lackeys in the FDA that forced them to reveal the results. The independent media is all over it, but because there is so much cross-ownership between the media, pharmaceutical companies, regulators and governments that are bought and paid for, the legacy media buried the story.

But growing distrust of the big pharmaceutical companies has spread despite their best efforts due to the dishonesty of these companies and the complicity of the regulatory authorities, hence more parents becoming more skepical about other vaccines. Who could blame them, and the companies, authorities, etc. have only got themselves to blame.

I see, so no it must be difficult to find a source. Guess I'll keep trusting the millions of medical praticioners then.

Of course it's true, and very easy to prove if you have a little bit of curiosity. But I'm not going to do your work for you.

fallaffelToday  06:06 pm JST

I see, so no it must be difficult to find a source. Guess I'll keep trusting the millions of medical praticioners then.

Of course it's true, and very easy to prove if you have a little bit of curiosity. But I'm not going to do your work for you.

Here's somewhere to start

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/paramount-importance-judge-orders-fda-hasten-release-pfizer-vaccine-docs-2022-01-07/

And that's one of the ones friendlier to Pfizer. Not so hard, was it?

Of course it's true, and very easy to prove if you have a little bit of curiosity. 

Then why can't you present any evidence? the reason is simple, it is not true, just disinformation that antivaxxer groups like to repeat without ever proving.

It is not like you don't do the work of others, it is that you can't do what you say can be done without any effort, which obviously means it is not possible to be done, because there is no such evidence.

fizer released results that were favourable to its own cause, and concealed results that showed serious adverse effects.

Completely false, not only because there is no such concealed results, but because the vaccination of literally billions of people do not indicate those adverse effects, which obviously is data not controlled by any company.

But growing distrust of the big pharmaceutical companies has spread despite their best efforts due to the dishonesty of these companies and the complicity of the regulatory authorities, hence more parents becoming more skepical about other vaccines.

Clear examples of disinformation have been described as the reason, examples you make no effort to defend. This means that people are being mislead by false information, which is not something desirable except for antivaxxer groups that profit from the already observable drop of public health standards that happen when vaccination is refused.

good news!!!, more healthy kids are growing up!!

Then why more disease outbreaks are happening? that is the opposite of healthy.

Here's somewhere to start

What is of imporance about this? it is a clear victory for the FDA to have a judge give a justification to ask for more funding so they can finally hire the people needed to correctly process the literally thousands of requests the get.

What information do you think a trial on thousands of people will prove when there is already information on billions of people proving the vaccines are safe?

That would assume the children that were not vaccinated are evenly distributed around the world, but this is not the case according to the article. If regions already struggling with their vaccination rates and that have other problems that make the vaccination much more important (such as malnutrition) that would mean problems will happen in those locations while vaccination is completely fine in other countries.

Actually, the regions mentioned in the article are home for almost half of the children in the world, which is still a very large number comparing to 25mln. I hope it closes the argument about distributions.