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

Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#61

Post by jhugo »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #45
ajross wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but that seems to be an impossible claim. In fact there are zero cases ( edit: two people have come by to cite statistics on all-cause death numbers, which aren't responsive here. PLEASE be careful with your numbers, people, those values include folks who died of car accidents and heroin overdoses, etc... ) where the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines are generally believed to have caused death, and 3 (three) deat…

Here is data for Canada. "Up to and including July 16, 2021, a total of 152 deaths were reported after the administration of a vaccine." https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#a...

Note that this number includes e.g. people who were hit by a bus after leaving the vaccination centre. It’s not at all a useful statistic for determining vaccine safety.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#62

Post by SquishyPanda23 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #58
resource0x wrote: post #19

Quote from https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-79959... "Citing new information about the variant’s ability to spread among vaccinated people , the CDC also recommended indoor masks for all teachers, staff, students and visitors at schools nationwide, regardless of vaccination status." If someone is vaccinated AND still spreading the virus, is it any different from having an asymthomatic case of CO…

Vaccinated people get in contact with the virus as much as the non vaccinated. The virus invades the bodies and start multiplying in both populations. The difference is that the vaccinated body is prepared to immediately attack the virus, something that takes weeks for the unvaccinated body to figure out. So during the short interval when the vaccinated body hasn't yet wiped out the virus, the person is technically i…

> Vaccinated people get in contact with the virus as much as the non vaccinated.

Is this known to be true, or is it an assumption you're making in your analysis?

Just curious, because I would have expected people who refuse to be vaccinated to also be more likely to socialize in ways that expose them to the virus.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#63

Post by dukeofdoom »

snet0 wrote: post #51
dukeofdoom wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is data for Canada. "Up to and including July 16, 2021, a total of 152 deaths were reported after the administration of a vaccine." https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#a...

The vaccine isn't expected to prevent all-cause mortality, though. People will die no matter whether they're vaccinated or not, the question is a) will they die because of covid and b) will they die because of the vaccine. Your statistics do not even approach this question.

This is governments own website, not "my statistics". Its a tracking system to report suspected adverse effects. As in a physician reported an adverse effect they noticed in the patient, soon after the admission of the vaccine. It does not include any potential long term effects. As we don't know them yet.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#64

Post by dukeofdoom »

jhugo wrote: post #61
dukeofdoom wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is data for Canada. "Up to and including July 16, 2021, a total of 152 deaths were reported after the administration of a vaccine." https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#a...

Note that this number includes e.g. people who were hit by a bus after leaving the vaccination centre. It’s not at all a useful statistic for determining vaccine safety.

only in your mind

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#65

Post by ajross »

Izkata wrote: post #54
ajross wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html Worst season in recent memory was 61k deaths among influenza patients. Last year saw 600k americans die of covid. Meanwhile flu fatalities cratered due to the pandemic response. Full data isn't available yet, but this site has some details (e.g. pediatric flu deaths dropped between 37x and 199x -- there was ONE child who died of the flu last year): https://www.cd…

> Worst season in recent memory was 61k deaths among influenza patients. Last year saw 600k americans die of covid. Those aren't directly comparable because the various flus have been circulating for years/decades and people have died all across that time. While people do have cross-immunity with sars-cov-2 and other coronaviruses, sars-cov-2 is new so it's hitting those decades of people all at once. The currently e…

> The currently estimated IFR across all age groups is around 0.15%, putting it on-par with the flu

Yeah, that's gonna need one hell of a cite. This is false.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#66

Post by BurningFrog »

SquishyPanda23 wrote: post #62
BurningFrog wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccinated people get in contact with the virus as much as the non vaccinated. The virus invades the bodies and start multiplying in both populations. The difference is that the vaccinated body is prepared to immediately attack the virus, something that takes weeks for the unvaccinated body to figure out. So during the short interval when the vaccinated body hasn't yet wiped out the virus, the person is technically i…

> Vaccinated people get in contact with the virus as much as the non vaccinated. Is this known to be true, or is it an assumption you're making in your analysis? Just curious, because I would have expected people who refuse to be vaccinated to also be more likely to socialize in ways that expose them to the virus.

I should probably have said "as easily". I doubt anyone knows which group is more exposed, and it's not very important for the argument.

Personally, I expose myself to a lot more virus risks than before I got vaccinated, if you want an opposing argument.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#67

Post by tedunangst »

resource0x wrote: post #19

Quote from https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-79959... "Citing new information about the variant’s ability to spread among vaccinated people , the CDC also recommended indoor masks for all teachers, staff, students and visitors at schools nationwide, regardless of vaccination status." If someone is vaccinated AND still spreading the virus, is it any different from having an asymthomatic case of CO…

One might reasonably extrapolate from a 10x (100x?) reduction in deaths to a 10x reduction in brain damage.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#68

Post by Izkata »

ajross wrote: post #57
Izkata wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All that masking and distance learning actually worked! Across US states, there is no correlation, let alone causation, between stringency of masks/social distancing/lockdown and outcome.

I'm curious what you're citing here. I've actually seen lots and lots of charts that show the opposite. Are you maybe thinking of some of the non-scientific arguments that included the initial (extremely large) March 2020 outbreak in NYC in the "mask wearing" bucket, despite the fact that almost all those infections occurred before the lockdown?

I don't have anything offhand anymore, it's more from a variety of sources over the whole past year. But from what I've seen most people cite, and the way you mentioned NYC, I'm guessing the charts you've seen are single location over time, rather than results across comparable locations (which is what I'm remembering - one example, months ago there was a test someone made for fun that showed you case/death outcome curves for various comparable locations and you had to pick out which one(s) did or did not have measures taken. I didn't save the link and have been looking for it on and off since then, but haven't been able to find it).

The problem with those one-location-over-time ones is that quite often people don't take into account the incubation period and testing delay - for example, in Illinois cases started dropping the day stricter lockdowns went into effect Nov last year, which means it wasn't the stricter lockdown that did it because the effects of the lockdowns would've taken 2-3 weeks to show up in the numbers.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#69

Post by [deleted] »

ajross wrote: post #17
gotoeleven wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there some reason to expect that covid-19 is different in long term effects than a flu? This study is saying it causes substantial brain damage, right? What possible mechanism is there for this?

Lots of diseases result in nerve damage. Polio was famous for this, after all. Different viruses infect different tissues. This is why we don't like getting sick, and push vaccines where we can. Infectious diseases that don't have long term effects are actually comparatively few in numbers -- those are the ones we tend to "get sick" with, for the simple reason that they aren't worth the effort of trying to control. T…

[deleted]

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#70

Post by Izkata »

ajross wrote: post #65
Izkata wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Worst season in recent memory was 61k deaths among influenza patients. Last year saw 600k americans die of covid. Those aren't directly comparable because the various flus have been circulating for years/decades and people have died all across that time. While people do have cross-immunity with sars-cov-2 and other coronaviruses, sars-cov-2 is new so it's hitting those decades of people all at once. The currently e…

> The currently estimated IFR across all age groups is around 0.15%, putting it on-par with the flu Yeah, that's gonna need one hell of a cite. This is false.

Here you go: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33768536/

> Acknowledging residual uncertainties, the available evidence suggests average global IFR of ~0.15% and ~1.5-2.0 billion infections by February 2021 with substantial differences in IFR and in infection spread across continents, countries and locations.

Post reply on HN