Newly-published minutes from JCVI meetings show that the group first looked at whether letting 12 to 15-year-olds catch Covid naturally was better than vaccinating them on May 13 (shown above). It looked at a range of reasons against vaccinating people in the age group, which included the argument that natural infection might be better and less risky

Newly published minutes from JCVI meetings reveal that the group examined whether letting Covid-infected children, aged 12-15 years old, catch it naturally was better than vaccinating them every May 13 (shown above). It considered a variety of reasons why people should not be vaccinated in this age group.

‘Zero Covid’ scientists have slammed the Government’s coronavirus vaccine advisory panel as being ‘anti-vax’ for considering the benefits of herd immunity over vaccination in children.

Members of Independent Sage, a vocal group of experts who have clung on to the idea of eliminating Covid, accused the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation of using youngsters as ‘human shields’ to protect adults.

Newly-published minutes from JCVI meetings show that the group first looked at whether letting 12 to 15-year-olds get Covid naturally was better than vaccinating them in spring, months before the rollout was expanded to teens.

Echoing the view of many independent experts, the JCVI accepted allowing the virus to circulate naturally could give youngsters strong immunity and also protect adults — without the risk of side effects from vaccines. 

The panel stressed that Covid posed a small threat to children and raised concerns over a heart inflammation condition linked with the jabs for young people. 

‘Children rarely die from severe disease or contract Covid; even children who have underlying comorbidities have a very small risk,’ the JCVI stated at its 32nd meeting on April 13.

“There is limited data about Covid vaccine use in children. It is important to consider the mild transient illness that Covid may cause versus any rare adverse effects associated with vaccination.

“There are arguments for allowing the virus circulation among children, which could increase immunity and boost immunity in adults.  

The group also thought that it might be better for children to catch Covid early, when they have a low risk of contracting the virus, so that they are less susceptible in adulthood.

Dr Kit Yates, a mathematician at the University of Bath, and Independent Sage member, quoted excerpts of JCVI minutes in a lengthy tweet thread. He wrote: ‘Anti vax or JCVI?” 

His colleague Professor Alice Roberts from the University of Birmingham was critical of the views expressed at the meetings. Other Independent Sage members described them in an ‘upsetting’ way. 

However, members also discussed the pros and cons to vaccinating healthy 12-15-year-olds (circled), which included keeping schools closed, reducing infection numbers, and giving parents reassurance

Only around 20 per cent of 12 to 15-year-olds in England have been vaccinated against Covid so far (purple), which is believed to be due to hesitation among parents

Only 20% of England’s 12-15 year-olds have been vaccinated against Covid (purple), and this is thought to be due to hesitation by parents 

MailOnline today heard from Professor Robert Dingwall who was a former member of the JCVI and participated in the discussions. He said it was ‘absurd to’ call the panel anti-vax. 

MailOnline was told by he that the JCVI is an eminent organization of vaccine scientists, some the best in the country. Therefore, they are pro-vaccination. 

“But they are sensitive, and they recognize that all vaccines carry small risks. The default position is that we don’t want anyone to get any vaccine until we have weighed all the benefits and risks.

“The JCVI has been keeping our nation safe for 60+ years by applying the same reasoning to all vaccines. 

The JCVI consists of 20 top virologists, epidemiologists and public health experts, as well as Sir Andrew Pollard (Oxford University), who helped develop AstraZeneca.

Experts warn the UK not to blindly follow the US in jabbing healthy five year-olds 

MailOnline has learned that British experts have told MailOnline that arguments to vaccinate children as young at five against Covid are’scientifically flawed’ after the US began to jab infants. 

An advisory panel to FDA agreed unanimously that Pfizer’s Pfizer’s jab for under-12s was a good idea.

The plans are expected to be approved by the American health chiefs within days. This will increase pressure on the UK for a similar move.

British scientists warn against recommending jabs to primary school-aged kids without carefully considering the risks. 

MailOnline was informed by Professor David Livermore, a medical-microbiologist at University of East Anglia: ‘Vaccinating children in order to protect adults via herd immunity seems ethically questionable and is scientifically weak.

Myocarditis is still a concern. This is a form of inflammation of the heart that can be detected in children, mostly in boys, and is found in approximately one in 10,000 cases.

Critics argue that children are better off catching Covid and getting natural protection than being admitted to ICU. The risk of being admitted is one in 500,000.

There are signs that natural immunity is already slowing down the spread of the disease in young people in Britain. However, some studies have shown that myocarditis is more common in people with Covid infection than it is in those without it. This complicates the situation.  

Professor Russell Viner is a pediatrician and a member the UK Government’s scientific advisory body SAGE. He said that it was important that the UK didn’t rush to make a decision in the wake the US announcement. 

The group has not hesitated to make difficult decisions that could put the UK at odds against other countries, such as adopting a different dosing strategy.

The group extended the recommended three week regimen to 12 weeks when the vaccines were first released in winter. This was to increase coverage and to see if the jabs might have a better chance of working.

The JCVI was heavily criticized at the time. The British Medical Association warned that the JCVI’s decisions were proving difficult to justify.

‘The absence of any international support for the UK’s approach is a cause of deep concern and risks undermining public and the profession’s trust in the vaccination programme,’ the union said.

Professor Dingwall, a Nottingham Trent University sociologe, explained that the JCVI weighed a variety of viewpoints in the spring, and summer, which was never considered when it made its final decision.

MailOnline was informed by him that the spring and summer meetings were intended to be broad-ranging discussions, without reaching conclusions.

“The committee considered a wide range of evidence and possible interpretations of it, and that’s how you can reach a consensus in these types committees.

“You look at all the evidence and make a decision,” Independent Sage members claim. 

He said, “If you are a absolute zero-infection absolutist then the vaccine should be approved quickly.” This would have meant that some children would have suffered severe consequences from heart inflammation. We would be discussing these issues. In the end, there was no clear signal.

Minutes from the May 13 meeting show that the JCVI thought that extending jabs to children under 16 could lead to ‘fewer infections and fewer outbreaks’. 

The group stated that vaccinations for older adults could also have an impact on the mortality rate at a subsequent meeting, which took place on May 20. 

The JCVI voted in September against Covid vaccines for healthy 12- to 15-year olds despite enormous political and public pressure. Because side effects were not clearly more important than the threat of Covid, the risk was not clearly outweighed by the benefit. 

It advised ministers to seek advice of other public health experts on the wider benefits that vaccinations for children can bring to society. 

The group had approved plans for children with severe underlying conditions and those who live with extremely vulnerable families to be jabbed. These groups were considered to be more beneficial than the risk, according to the group.

Professor Robert Dingwall, a former JCVI member who participated in the discussions, told MailOnline today that it was 'absurd' to label the JCVI as anti-vax

JCVI member Professor Adam Finn admitted that the long-term effects of vaccines on children are not yet known

MailOnline today spoke with Professor Robert Dingwall, a former member JCVI who participated in the discussions. He said it was ‘absurd” to label JCVI as anti vax. Professor Adam Finn, a JCVI member, has admitted that he sympathizes with parents who are reluctant to get their children vaccinated.

However, the JCVI raised concerns regarding myocarditis. It is a form if inflammation of the heart that can be found in healthy children (mostly boys) in approximately one in 10,000 cases following vaccination.   

All NHS-run Covid Testing Sites will be closed EARLY as of today 

After officials claimed that not enough people were turning up for swabs in evenings, the NHS-run Covid testing stations will be closing at 6 p.m.

The £37billion Test and Trace scheme has instructed all local and regional facilities in England to scale back their opening hours and shut early.  

Bosses from the new health agency in charge of the programme claimed that the decision was made due to’significantly lower demand for tests’ at night. 

But MPs Evening tests were convenient for working Britons, but a SAGE expert doubted the timing of the move. The cases are high as we head into winter. 

For people with confirmed symptoms or close relatives, most NHS drive-in and walk-in sites were open daily from 8am-8pm. 

There are approximately 500 NHS testing centers in the UK. 

The scale-down comes after a Commons inquiry found Test and Trace had been an ‘eyewatering’ waste of public cash that failed in all of its main objectives.  

The risk of a healthy 16-year-old being admitted to ICU by Covid was approximately one in 500,000, according to the group. 

Although most cases of myocarditis can be treated quickly, Professor Adam Finn of JCVI admitted that long-term effects are unknown. 

He advised parents to wait six more months before they rush to get their child vaccinated.

MailOnline was told by Professor Dingwall: “There is a general concern with side effects like myocarditis. What are we seeing is inflammation to heart tissue. So there could be risk for other tissue. It can take a while for the extent of the damage to become apparent. 

However, some studies suggest that myocarditis may be more common after Covid infection. This complicates matters further.

Data used to justify JCVI’s decision revealed that there were 259 Covid admissions at ICU in England for under-18s up to the end February 2021. 22 had no underlying medical conditions. 

Six of the 25 children who died at the same time from the virus also didn’t appear to have any comorbidities. 

After assessing that the rollout could maintain schools open and prevent disruptions, Professor Chris Whitty and the other chief medical officers approved it for children’s use several weeks later.    

Around 20% of England’s 12-15-year-olds have not been vaccinated against Covid. This is likely due to hesitation from parents.

MailOnline received a letter from a mother stating that she was uncomfortable having her son slam the coronavirus virus because it was not recommended by the JCVI (an independent agency of Government).

There are signs that natural immunity is slowing the spread of the disease in Britain among young people after a surge that began at the beginning the new term.

After stepping down from JCVI in August Professor Dingwall spoke in his personal capacity. He stated that the expert panel was against over-medicating.

MailOnline spoke to him, saying that there was a cultural divide at its root. It has roots in America. Some believe that vaccinations or drugs are the best way to prevent an infection. 

‘Ten years ago the JCVI examined the benefits of vaccinating children against chickenpox and concluded that it was not worthwhile.

“And we’re trying very difficult in the area of antibiotics to not promote the notion that “just because you have an infection, you should take a pill for it.”