Hearts Shredded, No Lives Saved - "OpenSAFELY: Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents"

"Among both adolescents and children, myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated groups..."

---

Preprint - Study title:

OpenSAFELY: Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents

Study highlights:

• 820,000 youth aged 5 - 15 yrs in the study. Observational study — database-based.

• Unvaccinated controls — for the first dose. It looks like the “controls” for the second dose were shotted. I suppose that was done in order to screen out the effects of the single dose group or something.

• No covid deaths in the study. None. That fact alone… nevermind. It’s all been said before. EDIT: Just to clarify/reitirate: the study age range was youth aged 5 - 15 yrs.

• Myocarditis and pericarditis found ONLY in the shotted!

---

Posted May 20, 2024 - Preprint

OpenSAFELY: Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents
medrxiv.org

Abstract

Background Children and adolescents in England were offered BNT162b2 as part of the national COVID-19 vaccine roll out from September 2021. We assessed the safety and effectiveness of first and second dose BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents in England.

Methods With the approval of NHS England, we conducted an observational study in the OpenSAFELY-TPP database, including a) adolescents aged 12-15 years, and b) children aged 5-11 years and comparing individuals receiving i) first vaccination with unvaccinated controls and ii) second vaccination to single-vaccinated controls. We matched vaccinated individuals with controls on age, sex, region, and other important characteristics. Outcomes were positive SARS-CoV-2 test (adolescents only); COVID-19 A&E attendance; COVID-19 hospitalisation; COVID-19 critical care admission; COVID-19 death, with non-COVID-19 death and fractures as negative control outcomes and A&E attendance, unplanned hospitalisation, pericarditis, and myocarditis as safety outcomes.

Results Amongst 820,926 previously unvaccinated adolescents, the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test comparing vaccination with no vaccination was 0.74 (95% CI 0.72-0.75), although the 20-week risks were similar. The IRRs were 0.60 (0.37-0.97) for COVID-19 A&E attendance, 0.58 (0.38-0.89) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 0.99 (0.93-1.06) for fractures, 0.89 (0.87-0.91) for A&E attendances and 0.88 (0.81-0.95) for unplanned hospitalisation. Amongst 441,858 adolescents who had received first vaccination IRRs comparing second dose with first dose only were 0.67 (0.65-0.69) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 1.00 (0.20-4.96) for COVID-19 A&E attendance, 0.60 (0.26-1.37) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 0.94 (0.84-1.05) for fractures, 0.93 (0.89-0.98) for A&E attendance and 0.99 (0.86-1.13) for unplanned hospitalisation. Amongst 283,422 previously unvaccinated children and 132,462 children who had received a first vaccine dose, COVID-19-related outcomes were too rare to allow IRRs to be estimated precisely. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalisation were slightly higher after first vaccination (IRRs versus no vaccination 1.05 (1.01-1.10) and 1.10 (0.95-1.26) respectively) but slightly lower after second vaccination (IRRs versus first dose 0.95 (0.86-1.05) and 0.78 (0.56-1.08) respectively). There were no COVID-19-related deaths in any group. Fewer than seven (exact number redacted) COVID-19-related critical care admissions occurred in the adolescent first dose vs unvaccinated cohort. Among both adolescents and children, myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated groups, with rates of 27 and 10 cases/million after first and second doses respectively. [Emphasis added]

Conclusion BNT162b2 vaccination in adolescents reduced COVID-19 A&E attendance and hospitalisation, although these outcomes were rare. Protection against positive SARS-CoV-2 tests was transient.

---

Adieu

---

EDIT — 2pm Tues. Aug 20 — Clarified the part about “no deaths from covid in the study” in the intro to reflect the fact the study groups was aged 5 -15 yrs. It reads a little strange as is. C’est la vie.