Does the NTT being high for healthy adults (which is what the study measured) necessarily mean that there is no benefit for those who cannot get vaccinated?

Sorry, my reply lacked a little bit of structure.

If vaccination does not confer benefits to children and elderly, wouldn't that imply that the herd effect from mass vaccination would in fact be good for them and those who cannot get the vaccine?

Yes, this is correct (but of course it also implies that we have an effective vaccine for healthy people).

If the vaccine is a perfect match, than the NNT might actually suffice when there would be a high amount of vaccination (I've found a study that got a NNT of 25 to achieve a protective herd effect)...perhaps I've been a little to rash in my statement.

Right now I think it's safe to say that vaccination rates are not nearly high enough to provide herd immunity, but it may perhaps be actually possible with very high rate of vaccination (I'm no epidemiologist, so don't take my word as gospel).

Added-before-I-pressed-reply: I actually found a study where children around the age of 3-15 were vaccinated and there was a significant herd immunization effect. The study says that you'd need about 80% of the children (because they are the main early vectors for spreading the virus) in a society vaccinated to achieve this. --> I'm most likely wrong

As for the article you've linked..I'm afraid pharmaceutical companies are a necessary evil...but sometimes it's really depressing.