adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Business

Pfizer's vaccine is FDA-approved for adults, but it's still a 'no-no' to vaccinate kids under 12 – Yahoo News Canada

Published

 on


Leading pediatricians said loudly and in unison Monday that doctors should not prescribe COVID-19 vaccines to children under 12.

With the Food and Drug Administration’s full approval of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine, such “off-label” use is now legal. But it’s definitely not a good idea, a number of experts said.

“We don’t have the data on young children. So that really ought to be a no-no,” said Dr. Jesse Goodman, an infectious disease expert at Georgetown University. “The science is not there to support dosing yet in small children.”

Children under 12 have not yet been approved to receive any COVID-19 vaccine, for the simple reason that it has not yet been proven safe and effective for them. Plus, while everyone 12 and up is given the same dose, a child of 5 years probably would need a smaller amount of vaccine than someone age 55, Goodman and others said.

Studies in children 5 to 11 are likely to be finished early this fall, Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech have said, with trials in younger children probably not ready until the end of the year or early next year.

“We need to see the data from those studies before we give this vaccine to younger children,” Dr. Lee Savio Beers, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said in a prepared statement. “The AAP recommends against giving the vaccine to children under 12 until authorized by the FDA.”

Lucas Kittikamron-Mora, 13, holds a sign in support of COVID-19 vaccinations as he receives his first Pfizer shot on May 13 in Des Plaines, Illinois.Lucas Kittikamron-Mora, 13, holds a sign in support of COVID-19 vaccinations as he receives his first Pfizer shot on May 13 in Des Plaines, Illinois.

Lucas Kittikamron-Mora, 13, holds a sign in support of COVID-19 vaccinations as he receives his first Pfizer shot on May 13 in Des Plaines, Illinois.

The pediatricians association “strongly recommends” that adolescents 12 and up, who are already eligible for the vaccine, be vaccinated as soon as possible. “The data from clinical trials and experience with the vaccine over the past four months in these adolescents show that it is safe and very effective in this age group,” Beers said.

Instead of vaccinations, children younger than 12 should wear masks while in school and in public settings, as well as avoid crowds and wash hands regularly, public health officials have said.

It’s not easy to pronounce: But one thing is certain about FDA-approved Comirnaty: It works

“While we wait for vaccines, we have measures that are effective,” Dr. Bob Frenck, lead researcher for Pfizer’s vaccine studies and director of Vaccine Research Center at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, said via email. “Masks can decrease risk of infection by about 85%, and appropriate distancing can decrease the risk by about 82%.”

Giving the adult dose could lead to unnecessary side effects.

“While the side effects are short-term and relatively mild, if you can avoid, or lessen, side effects and still get the same immune response, that is the course to take,” Frenck said.

Experts suspect private companies were waiting on full approval before requiring the vaccination for workers.Experts suspect private companies were waiting on full approval before requiring the vaccination for workers.

Experts suspect private companies were waiting on full approval before requiring the vaccination for workers.

Several vaccines, including Pfizer-BioNTech’s, have been shown to increase the risk of myocarditis, a swelling of the heart muscle. Although rare – affecting just 1 out of every 20,000 vaccinated people – and most cases have resolved quickly, the side effect was more common among younger men and adolescents. It’s not yet clear whether younger children also could develop the inflammation.

“We certainly saw a number of kids in our hospital with (myocarditis),” Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatric infectious disease expert at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said in a briefing Monday.

“I’m a fan of vaccines,” said Offit who helped develop a vaccine against rotavirus, which causes diarrheal disease in infants and children, and runs his hospital’s Vaccine Education Center. “I would be loath to vaccinate my 9- or 10-year-old until I saw the data.”

Doctors should not be in the business of trying to guess what lower dose would be safe and effective in a child, Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, chair of the AAP’s Committee on Infectious Diseases, said in a statement.

“We do not want individual physicians to be calculating doses and dosing schedules one-by-one for younger children based on the experience with the vaccine in older patients,” Maldonado said in a statement. “We should do this based on all of the evidence for each age group, and for that we need the trials to be completed.”

The AAP has called on the FDA to accelerate the process of authorizing shots for children under 12 by relying on early trial data rather than waiting for more complete results.

In the week ending Aug. 19, about 180,000 children and adolescents were infected with the coronavirus, virtually all with the delta variant, the AAP said Monday. Since the beginning of the pandemic, nearly 4.6 million minors have been infected – almost 15% of total cases – and rates have increased fourfold in just the past month, reaching roughly the same levels as last winter’s surge. Hospitalization and death rates remain low among children.

“We know parents are eager to be able to give their children the protection of this vaccine, and the American Academy of Pediatrics shares that feeling of urgency,” Beers said. “While we wait for a vaccine to be authorized for younger children, it’s important that everyone who is eligible now get the vaccine. That will help reduce the spread of the virus and protect those who are too young to be vaccinated.”

Contact Karen Weintraub at kweintraub@usatoday.com.

Health and patient safety coverage at USA TODAY is made possible in part by a grant from the Masimo Foundation for Ethics, Innovation and Competition in Healthcare. The Masimo Foundation does not provide editorial input.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: COVID vaccines still a ‘no-no’ for young children, pediatricians say

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Which Candidate Would You Hire? A or B?

Published

 on

Speaking from personal experience, a bad hire isn’t a good look. The last thing you want is to hear, “Who the hell hired Bob?” and have your hiring judgment questioned.

The job seeker who’s empathetic to the employer’s side of the hiring desk, which controls the hiring process, is rare.

One of the best things you can do to enhance your job search is to practice perspective-taking, which involves seeing things from a different perspective.

It’s natural for employers to find candidates who have empathy and an understanding of their challenges and pain points more attractive. Candidates like these are seen as potential allies rather than individuals only looking out for themselves. Since most job seekers approach employers with a ‘what’s in it for me’ mindset, practicing perspective-taking sets you apart.

“If there is any one secret of success, it lies in the ability to get the other person’s point of view and see things from that person’s angle as well as from your own.” – Henry Ford.

Perspective-taking makes you realize that from an employer’s POV hiring is fraught with risks employers want to avoid; thus, you consider what most job seekers don’t: How can I present myself as the least risky hiring option?

Here’s an exercise that’ll help you visualize the employer’s side of the hiring process.

 

Candidate A or B?

Imagine you’re the Director of Customer Service for a regional bank with 85 branches. You’re hiring a call centre manager who’ll work onsite at the bank’s head office, overseeing the bank’s 50-seat call centre. In addition to working with the call centre agents, the successful candidate will also interact with other departments, your boss, and members of the C-suite leadership team; in other words, they’ll be visible throughout the bank.

The job posting resulted in over 400 applications. The bank’s ATS and HR (phone interview vetting, skill assessment testing) selected five candidates, plus an employee referral, for you to interview. You aim to shortlist the six candidates to three, whom you’ll interview a second time, and then make a hiring decision. Before scheduling the interviews, which’ll take place between all your other ongoing responsibilities, you spend 5 – 10 minutes with each candidate’s resume and review their respective digital footprint and LinkedIn activity.

In your opinion, which candidate deserves a second interview?

Candidate A: Their resume provides quantitative numbers—evidence—of the results they’ve achieved. (Through enhanced agent training, reduced average handle time from 4:32 mins. to 2:43 minutes, which decreased the abandon rate from 4.6% to 2.2%.)

 

Candidate B: Their resume offers only opinions. (“I’m detail-oriented,” “I learn fast.”)

 

Candidate A: Looks you in the eye, has a firm handshake, smiles, and exudes confidence.

 

Candidate B: Doesn’t look you in the eye, has a weak handshake.

 

Candidate A: Referred by Ariya, who’s been with the bank for over 15 years and has a stellar record, having moved up from teller to credit analyst and is tracking to become a Managing Director.

 

Candidate B: Applied online. Based on your knowledge, they did nothing else to make their application more visible. (e.g., reached out to you or other bank employees)

 

Candidate A:  Well educated, grew up as a digital native, eager and energetic. Currently manages a 35-seat call center for a mid-size credit union. They mention they called the bank’s call centre several times and suggest ways to improve the caller experience.

 

Candidate B: Has been working in banking for over 25 years, managing the call center at their last bank for 17 years before being laid off eight months ago. They definitely have the experience to run a call centre. However, you have a nagging gut feeling that they’re just looking for a place to park themselves until they can afford to retire.

 

Candidate A: Has a fully completed LinkedIn profile (picture, eye-catching banner) packed with quantifying numbers. It’s evident how they were of value to their employers. Recently, they engaged constructively with posts and comments and published a LinkedIn article on managing Generations Y and Z call centre agents. Their Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter/X accounts aren’t controversial, sharing between ‘Happy Birthday’ and ‘Congratulations’ messages, their love of fine dining, baseball, and gardening.

 

Candidate B: Their LinkedIn profile is incomplete. The last time they posted on LinkedIn was seven months ago, ranting about how the government’s latest interest rate hike will plunge the country into a deep recession. Conspiracy theories abound on their Facebook page.

 

Candidate A: Notices the golf calendar on your desk, the putter and golf balls in the corner, and a photograph of Phil Mickelson putting on the green jacket at the 2010 Masters hanging on your wall. While nodding towards the picture, they say, “Evidently, you golf. Not being a golfer myself, what made you take up golf, which I understand is a frustrating sport?”

 

Candidate B: Doesn’t proactively engage in small talk. Waits for you to start the interview.

 

Which of the above candidates presents the least hiring risk? Will likely succeed (read: achieve the results the employer needs)? Will show your boss, upper management, and employees you know how to hire for competence and fit?

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Continue Reading

Business

Job Seekers’ Trinity Focus, Anger and Evidence

Published

 on

Though I have no empirical evidence to support my claim, I believe job search success can be achieved faster by using what I call “The Job Seekers’ Trinity” as your framework, the trinity being:

 

  1. The power of focus
  2. Managing your anger
  3. Presenting evidence

Each component plays a critical role in sustaining motivation and strategically positioning yourself for job search success. Harnessing your focus, managing your anger, and presenting compelling evidence (read: quantitative numbers of achieved results) will transform your job search from a daunting endeavour into a structured, persuasive job search campaign that employers will notice.

 

The Power of Focus

Your job search success is mainly determined by what you’re focused on, namely:

 

  • What you focus on.

 

Your life is controlled by what you focus on; thus, focusing on the positives shapes your mindset for positive outcomes. Yes, layoffs, which the media loves to report to keep us addicted to the news, are a daily occurrence, but so is hiring. Don’t let all the doom and gloom talk overshadow this fact. Focus on where you want to go, not on what others and the media want you to fear.

 

Bonus of not focusing on negatives: You’ll be happier.

 

  • Focus on how you can provide measurable value to employers.

 

If you’re struggling with your job search, the likely reason is that you’re not showing, along with providing evidence, employers how you can add tangible value to an employer’s bottom line. Business is a numbers game, yet few job seekers speak about their numbers. If you don’t focus on and talk about your numbers, how do you expect employers to see the value in hiring you?

 

Managing Your Anger

Displaying anger in public is never a good look. Professionals are expected to control their emotions, so public displays of anger are viewed as unprofessional.

LinkedIn has become a platform heavily populated with job seekers posting angry rants—fueled mainly by a sense of entitlement—bashing and criticizing employers, recruiters, and the government, proving many job seekers think the public display of their anger won’t negatively affect their job search.

When you’re unemployed, it’s natural to be angry when your family, friends, and neighbours are employed. “Why me?” is a constant question in your head. Additionally, job searching is fraught with frustrations, such as not getting responses to your applications and being ghosted after interviews.

The key is acknowledging your anger and not letting it dictate your actions, such as adding to the angry rants on LinkedIn and other social media platforms, which employers will see.

 

Undoubtedly, rejection, which is inevitable when job hunting, causes the most anger. What works for me is to reframe rejections, be it through being ghosted, email, a call or text, as “Every ‘No’ brings me one step closer to a ‘Yes.'”

 

Additionally, I’ve significantly reduced triggering my anger by eliminating any sense of entitlement and keeping my expectations in check. Neither you nor I are owed anything, including a job, respect, empathy, understanding, agreement, or even love. A sense of entitlement and anger are intrinsically linked. The more rights you perceive you have, the more anger you need to defend them. Losing any sense of entitlement you may have will make you less angry, which has no place in a job search.

 

Presenting Evidence

As I stated earlier, business is a numbers game. Since all business decisions, including hiring, are based on numbers, presenting evidence in the form of quantitative numbers is crucial.

Which candidate would you contact to set up an interview if you were hiring a social media manager:

 

  • “Managed Fabian Publishing’s social media accounts, posting content daily.”
  • “Designed and executed Fabian Publishing’s global social media strategy across 8.7 million LinkedIn, X/Twitter, Instagram and Facebook followers. Through consistent engagement with customers, followers, and influencers, increased social media lead generation by 46% year-over-year, generating in 2023 $7.6 million in revenue.”

 

Numerical evidence, not generic statements or opinions, is how you prove your value to employers. Stating you’re a “team player” or “results-driven,” as opposed to “I’m part of an inside sales team that generated in 2023 $8.5 million in sales,” or “In 2023 I managed three company-wide software implementations, all of which came under budget,” is meaningless to an employer.

Despite all the job search advice offered, I still see resumes and LinkedIn profiles listing generic responsibilities rather than accomplishments backed by numbers. A statement such as “managed a team” doesn’t convey your management responsibilities or your team’s achievements under your leadership. “Led a team of five to increase sales by 20%, from $3.7 million to $4.44 million, within six months” shows the value of your management skills.

Throughout your job search, constantly think of all the numbers you can provide—revenue generated, number of new clients, cost savings, reduced workload, waste reduction—as evidence to employers why you’d be a great value-add to their business.

The Job Seekers’ Trinity—focusing on the positive, managing your anger and providing evidence—is a framework that’ll increase the effectiveness of your job search activities and make you stand out in today’s hyper-competitive job market, thus expediting your job search to a successful conclusion.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Continue Reading

Business

Japan’s SoftBank returns to profit after gains at Vision Fund and other investments

Published

 on

 

TOKYO (AP) — Japanese technology group SoftBank swung back to profitability in the July-September quarter, boosted by positive results in its Vision Fund investments.

Tokyo-based SoftBank Group Corp. reported Tuesday a fiscal second quarter profit of nearly 1.18 trillion yen ($7.7 billion), compared with a 931 billion yen loss in the year-earlier period.

Quarterly sales edged up about 6% to nearly 1.77 trillion yen ($11.5 billion).

SoftBank credited income from royalties and licensing related to its holdings in Arm, a computer chip-designing company, whose business spans smartphones, data centers, networking equipment, automotive, consumer electronic devices, and AI applications.

The results were also helped by the absence of losses related to SoftBank’s investment in office-space sharing venture WeWork, which hit the previous fiscal year.

WeWork, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2023, emerged from Chapter 11 in June.

SoftBank has benefitted in recent months from rising share prices in some investment, such as U.S.-based e-commerce company Coupang, Chinese mobility provider DiDi Global and Bytedance, the Chinese developer of TikTok.

SoftBank’s financial results tend to swing wildly, partly because of its sprawling investment portfolio that includes search engine Yahoo, Chinese retailer Alibaba, and artificial intelligence company Nvidia.

SoftBank makes investments in a variety of companies that it groups together in a series of Vision Funds.

The company’s founder, Masayoshi Son, is a pioneer in technology investment in Japan. SoftBank Group does not give earnings forecasts.

___

Yuri Kageyama is on X:

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending