As far as I understand, the Comirnaty study does not include transmission-risk due to vaccinating children, and it cannot include that due to the study design. Nonetheless, the article includes the following sentences:
“Direct benefits of preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in children include protection against severe disease, hospitalizations, and severe or long-term complications, such as MIS-C. Indirect benefits include the likelihood of reduced transmission in the home and in school settings, including transmission affecting vulnerable persons, and safer in-person learning.”
The sentence about indirect benefits seems a bit misleading, however, because “preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection”, as far as I understand, can seem quite different things. Transmission reduction due to vaccination in adult studies seems to be between 63 and 89 per cent, depending on the study and whether the data include the delta variant (I guess it’s too early for Omicron data in this context). As far as I know, children are general less infectious than adults (due to smaller lungs), but that is mostly about short-term interactions. It is plausible that children that bring the infection to their parents also transmit the disease to them. So even smaller transmission-risk reductions would be valuable.
(As always, I’d be happy about corrections here.)
Interestingly, Germany’s Standing Committee on Vaccination (StiKo) does not yet recommend vaccination for 5-11 year olds due to lack of data (I can understand that point) but at the same time says:
It is also recommended to vaccinate children around whom there are contact persons at high risk of a severe course of COVID-19 who cannot be protected or only inadequately protected by a vaccination (e.g. the very old and immunosuppressed).
I don’t know whether there is data for that which I have overlooked. Moreover, the StiKo’s recommendation is said to be based on the consideration that it is unjust to let children be vaccinated just to protect others (in particular adults who decide not to get vaccinated just because they do not want to). However, it is unclear to me whether the StiKo’s position is that you should not count contributing to public goods at all, or whether the cost is just too high to justify that. (The StiKo recommendation is not yet published in the Robert Koch Institute’s Epidemiologisches Bulletin.) In any case, I would consider that the group for you provide a public good can sometimes be small enough to be very concrete—for example, I guess that if 20 kids in the kindergarten group are all vaccinated, the risk that the kindergarten has to close for a week because of an infection will be much lower.
3)
Finally, a comment on externalities.
As far as I understand, the Comirnaty study does not include transmission-risk due to vaccinating children, and it cannot include that due to the study design. Nonetheless, the article includes the following sentences:
The sentence about indirect benefits seems a bit misleading, however, because “preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection”, as far as I understand, can seem quite different things. Transmission reduction due to vaccination in adult studies seems to be between 63 and 89 per cent, depending on the study and whether the data include the delta variant (I guess it’s too early for Omicron data in this context). As far as I know, children are general less infectious than adults (due to smaller lungs), but that is mostly about short-term interactions. It is plausible that children that bring the infection to their parents also transmit the disease to them. So even smaller transmission-risk reductions would be valuable.
(As always, I’d be happy about corrections here.)
Interestingly, Germany’s Standing Committee on Vaccination (StiKo) does not yet recommend vaccination for 5-11 year olds due to lack of data (I can understand that point) but at the same time says:
I don’t know whether there is data for that which I have overlooked. Moreover, the StiKo’s recommendation is said to be based on the consideration that it is unjust to let children be vaccinated just to protect others (in particular adults who decide not to get vaccinated just because they do not want to). However, it is unclear to me whether the StiKo’s position is that you should not count contributing to public goods at all, or whether the cost is just too high to justify that. (The StiKo recommendation is not yet published in the Robert Koch Institute’s Epidemiologisches Bulletin.) In any case, I would consider that the group for you provide a public good can sometimes be small enough to be very concrete—for example, I guess that if 20 kids in the kindergarten group are all vaccinated, the risk that the kindergarten has to close for a week because of an infection will be much lower.