WHO revises COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for Omicron-era

The recommendations that should have been the recommendations all along especially in light of the mRNA vaccines abysmal performance and risk profile!

This group can't make up its mind. It has been proven wrong by various countries' government medical authorities several times since this epidemic began. No wonder the G7 countries let their own authorities make the medical directives now.

Roy SophveasonToday  12:26 pm JST

Everyone -- the WHO as well as pretty much any government under the sun -- made mistakes,

So you agree the WHO made mistakes.

Other countries corrected their mistakes quicker, more decisively, and with better results than the WHO.

All countries make their own medical directives, and always have. The WHO only makes non-binding recommendations, it has no authority to enforce or dictate policies.

I never said the WHO has authority to enforce or dictate policies. But the WHO makes directives that provide guidance.

For many countries especially in sub-Saharan ones the WHO is the de facto medical decision maker.

This group can't make up its mind.

What group are you talking about? do you call also the UN or the EU "a group"? there is no contradiction no confusion whatsoever, the role of a scientific authority for public health is to evaluate the current situation and formulate strategies that better fit that reality. It is similar to a doctor that adjust the dosage of a drug depending on how the patient condition changes.

Other countries corrected their mistakes quicker, more decisively, and with better results than the WHO.

The WHO is not a country, is the global public health authority and therefore it requires also a higher degree of evidence to justify a change of actions, recommendations, etc. Being responsible for a single location means evidence from that location is usually enough to justify a change, being responsible for the global situation is a completely different standard.

The argument that scientific institutions should have known things from the future so all the decisions would be correct at the end makes absolutely no sense. Part of the problems that come with a new disease becoming a pandemic is that a lot of things are unknown and still decisions have to be made according to the limited evidence that is available. This comes with the risk of those decisions not being the best possible, but that is still a much better thing than just letting people lose their health or lives waiting for more and more data.

The World Health Organization has tailored its COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for a new phase of the pandemic, suggesting that healthy children and adolescents may not necessarily need a shot but older, high-risk groups should get a booster between 6 to 12 months after their last vaccine.

The health agency defined high-risk populations as older adults, as well as younger people with other significant risk factors.

The WHO's recommendations come very late. Many countries have long stopped recommending these shots for the younger non-vulnerable population.

The WHO's recommendations come very late. Many countries have long stopped recommending these shots for the younger non-vulnerable population.

There is no such thing as a "non-vulnerable" population, just not specially vulnerable. The factor that most importantly drives the recommendations made now is the general level of immunity if a country reached a high level of immunity faster than the global average it would be obvious they could change priorities sooner as well.

The important part of the article is that young people are "low priority" for vaccination, not a contraindication but recognizing that other demographics justify better the costs associated with vaccination.

This also includes the possibility of other groups of people becoming a priority again according to new findings, for example the recently reported increase of neurodevelopmental problems in children born from mothers infected with SARS-CoV-2 may mean that women at a reproductive age could become a priority, not because they are specially affected by the virus, but because their children could.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2802745

I can't help but to feel sorry for those parents gullible enough to force the shot upon to their children.

Why anyone would take this vaccine still boggles my mind. It is an unnecessary vaccine as its efficacy is low, not to mention the health risks involved in taking the vaccine itself. Why it is still allowed on the market I will never know. More and more people around the world realize this. Natural infection also provides more immunity than the vaccine, just like for any other viral infection. Enough said.

I can't help but to feel sorry for those parents gullible enough to force the shot upon to their children

Because they believe the best experts on the field around the globe and the evidence they present that clearly proves vaccinating them is better, instead of believing you? Forcing the risk that come from infection is a much more irresponsible thing to do.

Why anyone would take this vaccine still boggles my mind

That comes from a deep antiscientific bias, for rational people this is no mystery, the data clearly shows children are also at risk of covid, and vaccinating them helps reducing that risk by a lot. Believing otherwise even when there is no evidence of it being the case do not make it an argument.

Natural infection also provides more immunity than the vaccine, just like for any other viral infection. Enough said.

No, it provides more risk, which is what you are supposedly trying to avoid with the immunity, that people that have been infected still get a reduction of risk of reinfection by being vaccinated clearly refutes your point.

WHO lost credibility a long time ago.

WHO lost credibility a long time ago.

According to whom? people that automatically reject anything that they don't want to hear? because the different public health authorities of the world clearly follow their recommendations and guidelines.

virusrexToday  08:07 am JST

WHO lost credibility a long time ago.

According to whom? 

Oh, this is easy to answer:

The US and the UK have sharply criticised a World Health Organizationreport into the beginnings of the coronavirus pandemic in Wuhan, implicitly accusing China of “withholding access to complete, original data and samples”.

The statement, also signed by 12 other countries 

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrkNxt6FiZk1h4PR3BLBQx.;_ylu=Y29sbwNpcjIEcG9zAzIEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1680246523/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.theguardian.com%2fworld%2f2021%2fmar%2f30%2fwho-criticises-chinas-data-sharing-as-it-releases-covid-origins-report/RK=2/RS=c93kcthQOPJew6x9.VrS890dvVg-

Namaste!

Oh, this is easy to answer:

Absolutely nothing in your link proves that the WHO has "lost credibility" in general, not even about covid in particular. Just that a report (that the WHO itself has called incomplete) should be better, they are not criticizing the WHO for not being able to impose measures in China (after all most of the countries signing are responsible for this in the first place since 2009) but instead are criticizing China for withholding information and not letting the WHO fulfill its mission.

virusrexToday  08:23 am JST

Oh, this is easy to answer:

Absolutely nothing in your link proves that the WHO has "lost credibility" in general, not even about covid in particular.

Absolutely those 12 countries disagree with you.

So do these guys:

Covid: Serious failures in WHO and global response, report finds

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-57085505

The World Health Organisation has lost all credibility

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-world-health-organisation-has-lost-all-credibility/

Namaste!

Absolutely those 12 countries disagree with you.

Again, absolutely nothing in your link support your claim that those 12 countries say the WHO "lost credibility" that is still your claim that you have supported with nothing.

What the link actually says is that they (and the WHO) consider the report incomplete thanks to the interference of China that did not let the delegation fullfill their purpose.

So do these guys:

Again, zero support for your claim, this is an actual report FROM the WHO that heavily criticizes the world governments for how the pandemic develop, nothing absolutely that support your claim.

The World Health Organisation has lost all credibility

So your evidence that the WHO lost the credibility of whole countries is the personal, unsubstantiated opinion of one single person that is not even an expert in public health? This works even against your claim, because it means you could not find support for your claim so you have to reduce yourself to present an opinion instead of actual evidence to support your claim.

Unless your claim is that the WHO lost credibility in the eyes of one single person in the world, that is completely different from what you originally claimed.

The WHO said in September last year that the end of the pandemic was "in sight". 

The WHO has "said" alot.

Such as confirming China's version of the outbreak in January 2020.

Which the world now knows was an outright lie.

But the WHO said China was being transparent.

The WHO said in September last year that the end of the pandemic was "in sight". 

And it is, as evidenced by how the measures can be importantly reduced without increasing the risk.

The WHO has "said" alot.

Such as confirming China's version of the outbreak in January 2020.

You keep making that claim but then you never support it, the WHO simply repeated what information China gave at the point where it was the only source of that information, but never confirmed it.

But the WHO said China was being transparent.

The WHO called China to be transparent, which means the country was not being open enough with the information.

The end of the pandemic is still not in sight, and of course the WHO is not to be trusted after their complicitness with China has been revealed. Complimenting China's handling of it has stripoed the WHO of any credibility it might have had.

The end of the pandemic is still not in sight

According to which authority on the field? just making up something do not make it a fact, specially when the experts clearly contradicts that calim.

and of course the WHO is not to be trusted after their complicitness with China has been revealed.

Again, you have no revealed anything of the sort, just that everybody had to use the information from China when it was the only country that could offer it, which is completely different from vouching for it.