A new study from the CDC shows that children who have recovered from COVID-19 are at a significantly higher risk of type 1 or type 2 diabetes. I have writtenpreviously that COVID-19 might be linked to diabetes, but those studies were in adults. But this study shows that the risk of diabetes might be greater for children who had COVID-19.
This should be more reason for parents to make certain that their children are fully vaccinated against the disease. Diabetes is a lifetime disease that must be closely managed with insulin and, in the case of type 2 diabetes, various medications.
This post will review the research on children who have had COVID-19 and the risk of type 1 or type 2 diabetes.
On 30 December 2021, the Centers for Disease Protection and Control (CDC) released two studies on COVID-19 vaccine safety for 5-11-year-olds that showed that there were few serious safety issues and showed that the vaccines prevented serious illness and hospitalization.
These two studies provide strong evidence for COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness for children and should provide confidence for parents to make sure their children get the vaccine.
This post will examine these peer-reviewed articles and pull out the key data for the reader.
Because I want to do the right thing for my own health and to protect others.
I don’t know if boosters will be necessary every few months or years. But this virus is so resilient and mutates so frequently, I am willing to bet we will need frequent boosters for any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
Just when we thought we might be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel for the COVID-19 pandemic, a new Omicron variant was discovered in Africa. Although many countries shut down travel from Africa, it’s probably too late — it probably was being spread before the Omicron variant was found.
Like when the Delta variant was first observed, there was a lot of confusion about how serious it was going to be and whether vaccines would be effective. It caused a surge in cases and deaths worldwide over the summer.
Although it’s very early, I think there is enough information to, at a minimum, understand what may be upcoming. Of course, as with everything about this pandemic, stay tuned because what we know today may be superseded by what we discover tomorrow.
The CDC just published a report that women who have COVID-19 at delivery have an increased risk of stillbirth compared to women who do not have the disease. If this isn’t a good reason for pregnant women to get the COVID-19 vaccine, I do not know what else to say.
This article will be very short because the published paper really provided only three pieces of data which are convincing reasons for pregnant women should get the COVID-19 vaccines.
Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about the social and legal policies of vaccination. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable disease. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.
This article are quoted verbatim, except for minor editing changes. We both felt a broader audience for this anti-vaccine tactic to spread misinformation will be useful to understand. In essence, an anti-vaccine group asked the CDC for a single patient record, something the CDC doesn’t keep, and then imply something nefarious is happening because the CDC couldn’t provide that information.
Below, Professor Reiss reviews how this is a cynical tactic to make it appear something is going on with vaccines, when it isn’t.
Many of us have a love/hate relationship with Facebook – but most of us realized how little it cared about anti-vaccine posts when the COVID-19 vaccines were starting to show high effectiveness and safety in clinical trials. Once we began to believe that we might have COVID-19 vaccines by the end of 2020 (which proved to be true), the anti-vaxxers started to move into full action.
I even started to track and debunk the ridiculous claims of the COVID-19 vaccine deniers, most of which I found on various Facebook posts and comments.
I hate to blame Facebook for all of society’s ills, but it’s clear that they are deeply responsible for the lack of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the USA and many other countries. Given that only 12 accounts on social media are responsible for around 73% of the anti-vaccine content, it would have been easy for Facebook to block those accounts and keep the noise to a minimum.
I recently discussed a new CDC study that stated that the COVID-19 vaccines provided better protection than a previous infection. Unfortunately, I buried the lede – COVID-19 vaccines are better than a prior COVID-19 infection in keeping you out of the hospital.
Not to be repeatedly repetitive, but I am going to re-review that paper in light of the lede – in other words, the anti-vaxxers keep ranting on about a prior COVID-19 infection. I don’t think it means what they think it means.
I keep reading anti-vaccine claims that a “natural” COVID-19 infection provides more protection than the vaccine. However, a newly published study from the CDC contradicts that belief. They found that those who were unvaccinated and had a recent infection were over five times more likely to have COVID-19 than those who were recently fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and did not have a prior infection.
In other words, the COVID-19 vaccines provide more protection than does a previous COVID-19 infection.
The CDC published a study in the peer-reviewed Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report on 22 October 2021 which examined the risk of non-COVID mortality in a COVID-19 vaccine group compared to an unvaccinated group. So that I don’t bury the lede, the risk of death from non-COVID causes was much higher in the unvaccinated group compared to the vaccinated one.