Robert Dingwall, a member of the JCVI (Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation) has suggested that allowing children to catch Covid and build up natural immunity to the infection, may be safer than vaccinating them.
Dingwall (pictured) sits on the JCVI. The committee advises the government on who should get vaccinated and when. It is currently considering whether 12-18 year-olds should receive the jab. Dingwall took to Twitter yesterday and stated:
“Teenagers are at intrinsically low risk from Covid. Vaccines must be exceptionally safe to beat this. Given the low risk of Covid for most teenagers, it is not immoral to think that they may be better protected by natural immunity generated through infection than by asking them to take the possible risk of a vaccine.”
He went on to say that the pandemic, “would end through population immunity, whether from vaccination or prior infection”.
However, SAGE member John Edmunds told BBC Newsnight last night, that the country should not fully reopen until all secondary school children are vaccinated. He said:
“At some point we do have to dismantle all of these measures that we’ve put in place. I think, for me, the safest time to do that is when children have been vaccinated, certainly secondary-school-aged children at least. That’s the safest way.”
John Edmunds is a lunatic. As Robert Dingwall pointed out, Covid presents no real risk to children. Children should not be coerced into taking a medicine on behalf of someone else.
In fact, Dingwall should go further. The great majority of the population are at no serious risk from Covid. The evidence is overwhelming that the jabs present a far greater risk than the virus.
Given the low risk of Covid for most teenagers, it is not immoral to think that they may be better protected by natural immunity generated through infection than by asking them to take the *possible* risk of a vaccine. (3/8)
— Robert Dingwall 🏴 🇪🇺 Reunite (@rwjdingwall) June 30, 2021