Very unlikely, they are too young.

This article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2315740-mystery-outbrea... - states the kids were aged 2 to 5, which is too young for the vaccine.

That doesn't mean they weren't. The article just doesn't say. I don't know about the UK, but in the U.S., because of the EUA, many younger people got vaccinated before the vaccine was approved for their age group, therefore the question is fair.

In the uk they weren't.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/increase-in-hepatitis-liv...

No, you're absolutely right. But being in the UK (and the vaccine being provided by the NHS) does mean it's highly, highly unlikely that they were vaccinated as it has not been offered to the under 5s.

From the article:

> In a statement, it said "no link to the Covid-19 vaccine was identified and detailed information collected through a questionnaire to cases about food, drink and personal habits failed to identify any common exposure."

So… maybe?

The first article I read about this during the weekend mentioned that none of the UK children had been vaccinated. Sadly I couldn't find it but this one (https://theconversation.com/hepatitis-cases-are-increasing-a...) claims the same.

Father to 2 children in the UK here. My 10 year old has only JUST been offered the vaccine, my teenager was only offered it a month ago.

So very unlikely these children were vaccinated given the age ranges.

Vaccinated*, and can you specify which vaccination you mean specifically?

I mean tons of people got all the vaccinations but for some reason draw the line at the Covid-19 one(s). I mean I get some reluctance with the new mRNA types, but there's "traditional" types as well, and so far there are no statistically significant side effects to the mRNA types.

I mean I say so far, personally I'm already convinced, but for the skeptics, how long will you wait to see if there's any long term effects?

10-20 years

> Vaccinated*

'Vaxxed' is perfectly cromulent.