Live data from Hacker News

Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

reuters.com

71–80 of 415 posts

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#71
post #38

Slightly off topic, but it is quite interesting that US media very consistently uses "Pfizer" if the news is good and some variant of "Pfizer/Biontec" if the news is bad. The opposite holds of course for the German press, which addresses the vaccine as "Biontec" when the news is good.

Somebody even made a copypasta about it in Italian. My translation is the following:

"I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Pfizer vaccine, is in fact, the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, BioNTech plus Pfizer vaccine. Pfizer did not develop the vaccine by itself, but rather another company called BioNTech created the original formula, which went through Pfizer's clinical trials and became the vaccine we use these days.

Many people who got the vaccine refer to it as the Pfizer vaccine, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine which is widely used today is often called "Pfizer", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the vaccine initially developed by BioNTech.

There really is a Pfizer contribute to the vaccine, and these people should partly thank that corporation, but it is just a part of what allowed them to be vaccinated. Pfizer is the distributor and responsible for clinical trials. Clinical trials are an essential part of a vaccine, but useless by itself; they can only be done once somebody developed the vaccine in the first place. So, the Pfizer vaccine can only be used because it was developed in the first place by BioNTech: the whole system is basically BioNTech with Pfizer contributions, or BioNTech/Pfizer. The so-called Pfizer vaccine should really be called BioNTech/Pfizer!"

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#72
post #20

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

But it's only been a few months since administration, will the gap between expected and actual keep growing, or will they eventually level out?

Considering it mentions this is showing up within 1 week of administration, and there are already millions of "doses administered" accounted for in the figures, I wouldn't expect the rate to change significantly either way. I'm not a statistician though.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#73

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…

> As well, the overall amount of spike protein in the body will be less.

Less that an acute infection, probably.

Less than a mild asymptomatic infection? Do we know that? My understanding was that they packed quite a lot of mRNA into the shot in order to ensure a response.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#74
post #35

This is based on VAERS data. I encourage the curious to look at this data. I did. I would characterize its quality as so poor that probably no conclusions at all can be drawn from it. And I usually find myself defending the use of noisy and/or small data in similar situations.

What is the right way to collect this data, given that the frontline practitioners are actively discouraging any patients from making a connection for adverse reactions with the vaccine?

Put another way: Isn’t VAERS a necessary solution to ensure that the healthcare system does not misrepresent the safety of the vaccines? Transparency should be a first principle requirement for science.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#75
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure, unadulterated speculation: It felt like the mRNA took hold in both my arm, _and_ my heart. Which given the proximity and paths between, is not entirely surprising. It felt like the vaccine entered my bloodstream and was taken up, in part, by the heart. Which then started making spike protein and soliciting an immune response. I'd really love to learn more about this, but haven't been able to find any good resou…

This post was interesting to me and would mean that if the shot got into your bloodstream, it could've been mis-administered? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27464226

That is very intriguing.

The location of injection site was spot on. However, I'm unsure if there are other factors at work beyond specifically location

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#76
post #65
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard less than 1% of adverse reactions are actually reported to VAERS.

Yeah, how many people actually bother to report their symptoms if they’re not serious enough to warrant a trip to the doctor (who might report on their behalf)? Mild myo can go undetected quite easily. In fact, it’s known well as being a cause of death in young athletes who only learn of the condition when their heart gives out during intense physical exertion.

I am curious: Who reports that dude that died of a heart attack laying in a ditch somewhere.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#77

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

This depends a lot on the probability of contracting Covid at all. Roughly speaking, if there's a 1% chance to contract the disease, the vaccine has to be at least 100 times safer. As the chance to catch Covid decreases over time, the risks associated with vaccines become more of a problem.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

“Should” Has it been tested?

Its in testing right now.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#80
post #35

This is based on VAERS data. I encourage the curious to look at this data. I did. I would characterize its quality as so poor that probably no conclusions at all can be drawn from it. And I usually find myself defending the use of noisy and/or small data in similar situations.

Covid-19 is meticulously measured and tracked in every human being, but no one is interested in adverse vaccine effects. Things that make you think...
Post reply on HN