51–60 of 415 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the Pfizer vaccine doesn't contain any of the virus, unless it's just the immune reaction to the spike protein that causes the problem?
Maybe having immune system working hard somehow naturally puts strain on cardiovascular systems?
I think that many people who did not have heart issues before don't know what to look for or how it feels. Personally, I did not know I had palpitations until I googled it later. Similarly, I suspect, that some kids/young adults may have had symptoms but don't report.
Can the government present anything in a useful manner? The most important information, i.e. if the young men engaged in heavy sports right after getting the vaccine, is missing. Heavy sports is obviously also dangerous while recovering from the flu. But the disorganized chaotic government presentation doesn't give any useful information.
Really, if this were intended for public consumption, they would avoid abbreviations like "AEs" and instead spell out "Adverse Events" or maybe be much more specific. I doubt most people even on here know what "pyrexia" is, I had to look it up to be sure.
Anyway, more to your point, the data presented is collected from VAERS. I've spent some time reading these exact data lately to try to understand the risk/reward for vaccinating children. The system is intentionally, I think, focused on a free-text data input, along with a huge grab bag of drop-down-box symptoms. In any event, there's no obvious way to ensure people report other activities.
If you read some of the VAERS reports you might appreciate my point better. They range from professional reports clearly written by a medical professional, to personal discussions, and in this age group have a lot of reports written by parents. In none of the hundreds I read did a person describe participation in heavy sports. By that omission we can conclude nothing whatsoever regarding the relationship between heavy sports and vaccination.
The powerpoint from FDA that I read actually gave a lot of useful information. It was a much better summary of the VAERS data than I was able to glean by manually reading through the reports. Myocarditis and syncope seemed to me to be the most frequent side effect of vaccination at least in this age group, and the powerpoint seems to align with my impression.
EDIT: Syncope seemed to me to be the most frequent based on eyeballing the reports. I actually didn't notice myocarditis at all when I first looked through VAERS reports, not sure why I wrote that originally.
Very interesting given one of the lesser known complications of covid can be myocarditis in otherwise healthy individuals with few or no other covid symptoms. In fact, it’s likely the incidence of covid-induced myocarditis is vastly underreported given it often shows no symptoms and can only reasonably be diagnosed with a cardiac MRI which is not always widely available or advised for less-serious heart conditions. I…
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7239191/
I wonder if you can get myocarditits both from exposure and the vaccine. Covid is in your heart tissue, triggering an immune response. When you get the vaccine, your immune system is going to ramp up even further to deal with this Covid in your heart. This would only affect people who had prior Covid exposure it would seem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the Pfizer vaccine doesn't contain any of the virus, unless it's just the immune reaction to the spike protein that causes the problem?
Maybe having immune system working hard somehow naturally puts strain on cardiovascular systems?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are alarming based on the measure of Observed vs. Expected cases. Observed (O) cases in that age group: 283 Expected (E) cases in that age group: 10-102 So at least double the top of the confidence interval, for expected.
but that's out of 13m doses, so ~200 out of 13m. I'm not sure how that compares to the expected harm from catching covid but I imagine the vaccine still ends up massively favourable
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Context matters here. I'd hate for this to get blown out of proportion like the blood clot issue did, causing massive confidence declines in places all over, especially those struggling to roll out vaccines and keep their COVID cases under control. Obviously, if the numbers are alarming, we must react accordingly.
They are alarming based on the measure of Observed vs. Expected cases. Observed (O) cases in that age group: 283 Expected (E) cases in that age group: 10-102 So at least double the top of the confidence interval, for expected.
You can look at the risk of what it's preventing (covid has already killed ~1700 people per million in the US), or compare to other activities and risk levels.
Relative risk comparisons between different activities are often not useful. For example, the risk of shark-death at the beach might look alarming when compared to my risk of shark-death-at-home, but actually it's vanishingly unlikely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The spike protein causes cellular damage, doesn’t matter if it comes from the vaccine or virus
Yes, but the route in which a vaccination takes place (IM injection into deltoid) should mean that much much less of the spike protein ends up in the heart and lungs vs a natural infection. As well, the overall amount of spike protein in the body will be less. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/04/sp... “Consider what happens when you’re infected by the actual coronavirus. We know now that the hug…
Recent research (per No Agenda shownotes) showed that unlike traditional vaccines, Moderna mRNA spread through the bloodstream producing and distributing spike protein in the entire body.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crude rate seems to be observed cases per million doses administered. So a lot more incidents than expected, but still extremely rare (0.002% of doses). Edit: missed an extra "0" in that percent, thanks for the the catch everyone who did
For those getting worried like I was, it’s 0.002% or one in 50,000, not 0.02% or one in 5,000.
https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crude rate seems to be observed cases per million doses administered. So a lot more incidents than expected, but still extremely rare (0.002% of doses). Edit: missed an extra "0" in that percent, thanks for the the catch everyone who did
For those getting worried like I was, it’s 0.002% or one in 50,000, not 0.02% or one in 5,000.