Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 415 posts

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

#91

Post by thatswrong0 »

elliekelly wrote: post #12
thatswrong0 wrote: post #3

Anecdote: I had this reaction to the 2nd dose of the Pfizer vaccine, saw a cardiologist and she mentioned that she’s been seeing this quite a bit after the second dose. Have had to lay low for a month, but it seems like the symptoms are finally passing.

If you don’t mind sharing I’d be curious to hear how you knew something was wrong? If I were a man in my teens or early 20s (or even 30s!) I feel like I would chalk any chest pain up to anxiety or heartburn before I ever even considered the possibility of a heart situation. My understanding is myocarditis is usually not a big deal but it does require treatment and isn’t something you should just “wait and see” if it…

I went to the doctor because of general shortness of breath all the time, heart rate spiking during normal activity like standing up, palpitations out the wazoo, and general fatigue. If I felt “sick” or fluish that’d be one thing.. this seemed different.

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

#92

Post by dv_dt »

DaniloDias wrote: post #74
beefman wrote: 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.

After both doses of my vaccine I was given a link and instructions how to report adverse reactions.

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

#93

Post by jb775 »

beefman wrote: 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.

So instead of wanting to look into a possible major issue with the safety of the Covid vaccines, you'd rather insult the data without providing any substantiating source, then put your hands over your ears and say "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOUUUUU LA LA LA LA"

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

#94

Post by JPKab »

My mother-in-law died 9 days ago, after being on life-support for 2 weeks. All following a sudden onset cardiac arrest 3 hours after getting her second Pfizer shot. She had a fever from the shot, was sitting in the living room watching a movie with family, and her heart suddenly stopped. She was healthy and in her early 60's. The medical team, after a week, concluded it was likely vaccine induced, and reported it to VAERS.

A neighbor of mine, who is 35 year old male, had an almost exactly similar event. Because he was younger, he survived. His medical team also reported to VAERS, and the Mayo clinic is researching it.

The vaccine is generally safe, and you should get it if you aren't immune to COVID. That being said, the effort to prevent vaccine hesitancy has suppressed media reporting on these events, understandably. They are likely more common than we think, but still relatively rare.

MRNA is going to be a revolutionary technology, but we should be honest about the fact that there are going to be some individuals who will experience some extremely nasty side-effects.

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

#95

Post by jb775 »

dv_dt wrote: post #92
DaniloDias wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

After both doses of my vaccine I was given a link and instructions how to report adverse reactions.

By the looks of it, you should keep that handy.

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

#96

Post by seattle_spring »

breadzeppelin__ wrote: post #89
splithalf wrote: post #44

We’ve known this for a month or so. The bottom line is that experts still recommend getting the vaccine.

meanwhile the many experts who don't recommend it are widely and very vocally shunned as 'science deniers'. Andddd downvoted. Cant even point out that there are actual experts on both sides of the argument without people being upset about it.

Given everything we know about the virus and the vaccines, that seems like an appropriate label.

> Andddd downvoted. Cant even point out that there are actual experts on both sides of the argument without people being upset about it

I doubt anyone who downvoted you is "upset."

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

#97

Post by smhenderson »

DaniloDias wrote: post #74
beefman wrote: 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.

given that the frontline practitioners are actively discouraging any patients from making a connection for adverse reactions with the vaccine?

Do you have a source for this? As another poster replied, I was encouraged to report symptoms and given a packet with information on what to look out for, what to report and a website to do so.

Same with my wife and two adult children.

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

#98

Post by JPKab »

peanut_worm wrote: post #78

Did anyone else get really bad side effects? I felt awful after my first shot and now I an currently recovering from my second shot and feel even worse. I don’t think I have ever felt this bad from an illness.

There is a relatively high rate (fully acknowledged) of high fever from the MRNA vaccines, particularly after the second dose. Compared to standard vaccines of the past, the rate of fever and illness is dramatically higher. But COVID is so dangerous and contagious that the benefit is higher than the cost.

I say this as somebody (if you look at some of my previous comments) who lost my Mother-in-law due to a rare side-effect that is still being researched after her second shot.

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

#99

Post by heisenbit »

nwellnhof wrote: post #77
shawabawa3 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> As the chance to catch Covid decreases over time, the risks associated with vaccines become more of a problem.

This is a big assumption. It could also be that it becomes part of the virus background infections we all deal with except that it is high risk if you get it the first time.

When looking that the risk of an non vaccinated individual catching Covid today keep in mind that a lot of people have been vaccinated and the incidence numbers de-facto refer to incidences of the non vaccinated part of the population which would justify a smaller denominator than used (whole population).

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

#100

Post by sudosysgen »

nwellnhof wrote: post #77
shawabawa3 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Without vaccines the risk of catching covid is of around 70% at least.
Post reply on HN